MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3196399896 · doi:10.1145/3460421.3480417

Self-supervised Human Activity Recognition by Learning to Predict Cross-Dimensional Motion

2021· article· en· W3196399896 on OpenAlexaff
Setareh Rahimi Taghanaki, Michael J. Rainbow, Ali Etemad

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicContext-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActivity recognitionComputer scienceAccelerometerArtificial intelligenceLeverage (statistics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Convolutional neural networkTransfer of learningMachine learningConvolution (computer science)Artificial neural networkTask (project management)Motion (physics)Dimension (graph theory)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose the use of self-supervised learning for human activity recognition with smartphone accelerometer data. Our proposed solution consists of two steps. First, the representations of unlabeled input signals are learned by training a deep convolutional neural network to predict a segment of accelerometer values. Our model exploits a novel scheme to leverage past and present motion in x and y dimensions, as well as past values of the z axis to predict values in the z dimension. This cross-dimensional prediction approach results in effective pretext training with which our model learns to extract strong representations. Next, we freeze the convolution blocks and transfer the weights to our downstream network aimed at human activity recognition. For this task, we add a number of fully connected layers to the end of the frozen network and train the added layers with labeled accelerometer signals to learn to classify human activities. We evaluate the performance of our method on three publicly available human activity datasets: UCI HAR, MotionSense, and HAPT. The results show that our approach outperforms the existing methods and sets new state-of-the-art results.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.598
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.248 · 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.

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

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicContext-Aware Activity Recognition SystemsFrench-language works237,207