Active Sense: Early Staging of Non-Insulin Dependent Diabetes Mellitus (NIDDM) Hinges upon Recognizing Daily Activity Pattern
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Human Activity Recognition (HAR) system allows various accessible entries for the early diagnosis of Diabetes as one of the nescient applications domains for the HAR. Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) was applied and recognized 13 activities that resemble diabetes symptoms. Afterward, risk factor assessment for an experimental subject identified similar activity pattern attributes between diabetic patients and the experimental subject. Because of this, a trained LSTM model was deployed to monitor the average time length for every activity performed by the experimental subject for 30 consecutive days. Concurrently, the symptomatic diabetes activity patterns of diabetic patients were explored. The cosine similarity of activity patterns of the experimental subject and diabetic patients measured 57.39%, putting the experimental subject into moderate risk factor class. The experimental subject was clinically tested for risk factors using the diabetic clinical diagnosis process, known as the A1C. The A1C level was 6.1%, recognizing the experimental subject as a patient suffering from Diabetes. Thus, the proposed novel approach remarkably classifies the risk factor level based on activity patterns.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".