MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3049542201 · doi:10.1109/jsen.2020.3016611

Sitting Posture Recognition Using a Spiking Neural Network

2020· article· en· W3049542201 on OpenAlexaff
Jianquan Wang, Basim Hafidh, Haiwei Dong, Abdulmotaleb El Saddik

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Sensors Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTactile and Sensory Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSittingComputer scienceENCODEArtificial intelligenceClassifier (UML)Artificial neural networkConstruct (python library)Pattern recognition (psychology)Machine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To increase the quality of citizens' lives, we designed a personalized smart chair system to recognize sitting behaviors. The system can receive surface pressure data from the designed sensor and provide feedback for guiding the user towards proper sitting postures. We used a liquid state machine and a logistic regression classifier to construct a spiking neural network for classifying 15 sitting postures. To allow this system to read our pressure data into the spiking neurons, we designed an algorithm to encode map-like data into cosine-rank sparsity data. The experimental results consisting of 15 sitting postures from 19 participants show that the prediction precision of our SNN is 88.52%.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.386
Threshold uncertainty score0.625

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.133
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.177 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Sensors JournalSame topicTactile and Sensory InteractionsFrench-language works237,207