Bidirectional Residual LSTM-based Human Activity Recognition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Residual Long Short Term Memory (LSTM) deep learning approach is attracting attension of many researchers due to its efficiency when trained on high dimensional datasets. Nowadays, Human Activity Recognition (HAR) has come with enormous challenges that have to be addressed. In addressing such a problem, one can think of developing an application that can help the elderly people as an assistant when it works in collaboration with other timely technologies such as wearable devices with the help of IoT. Many research works are using a standard dataset in evaluating their proposed method in this regard. The dataset comes with its own challenge such as imbalanced classes. In this work, we propose to apply different machine learning techniques to address the specified problems and the method is validated on a standard dataset. To validate the proposed method, we evaluated using different standard metrics such as classification accuracy, precision, recall, f1-score, and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve. The proposed method achieves an Area Under Curve (AUC) of 100%, 97.66% of accuracy, 91.59% precision, 93.75% of recall and 92.66% of F1-score respectively.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".