Elderly Fall Detection with an Accelerometer Using Lightweight Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Falls have been one of the main threats to people’s health, especially for the elderly. Detecting falls in time can prevent the long lying time, which is extremely fatal. This paper intends to show the efficacy of detecting falls using a wearable accelerometer. In the past decade, the fall detection problem has been extensively studied. However, since the hardware resources of wearable devices are limited, designing highly accurate embeddable models with feasible computational cost remains an open research problem. In this paper, different types of shallow and lightweight neural networks, including supervised and unsupervised models are explored to improve the fall detection results. Experiment results on a large open dataset show that the lightweight neural networks proposed have obtained much better results than machine learning methods used in previous work. Moreover, the storage and computation requirements of these lightweight models are only a few hundredths of deep neural networks in literature. In tested lightweight neural networks, the best one is proved to be the supervised convolutional neural network (CNN) that can achieve an accuracy beyond 99.9% with only 441 parameters. Its storage and computation requirements are only 1.2 KB and 0.008 MFLOPs, which make it more suitable to be implemented in wearable devices with restricted memory size and computation power.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".