Bibliographic record
Abstract
A successive similar pattern (SSP) is a series of similar sequences that occur consecutively at non-regular intervals in time series. Mining SSPs could provide valuable information without a priori knowledge, which is crucial in many applications ranging from health monitoring to activity recognition. However, most existing work is computationally expensive, focuses only on periodic patterns occurring in regular time intervals, and is unable to recognize patterns containing multiple periods. Here we investigate a more general problem of finding similar patterns occurring successively, in which the similarity between patterns is measured by the z -normalized Euclidean distance. We propose a linear time, robust method, called Multiple-length Successive sIMilar PAtterns Detector (mSIMPAD), that mines SSPs of multiple lengths, making no assumptions regarding periodicity. We apply our method on the detection of repetitive movement using a wearable inertial measurement unit. The experiments were conducted on three public datasets, two of which contain simple walking and idle data, whereas the third is more complex and contains multiple activities. mSIMPAD achieved F-score improvements of 3.2% and 6.5%, respectively, over the simple and complex datasets compared to the state-of-the-art walking detector. In addition, mSIMPAD is scalable and applicable to real-time applications since it operates in linear time complexity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.041 | 0.045 |
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".