A Survey of Vision-Based Transfer Learning in Human Activity Recognition
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human activity recognition (HAR) and transfer learning (TL) are two broad areas widely studied in computational intelligence (CI) and artificial intelligence (AI) applications. Much effort has been put into developing suitable solutions to advance the current performance of existing systems. However, challenges are facing the existing methods of HAR. In HAR, the variations in data required in HAR systems pose challenges to many existing solutions. The type of sensory information used could play an important role in overcoming some of these challenges. Vision-based information in 3D acquired using RGB-D cameras is one type. Furthermore, with the successes encountered in TL, HAR stands to benefit from TL to address challenges to existing methods. Therefore, it is important to review the current state-of-the-art related to both areas. This paper presents a comprehensive survey of vision-based HAR using different methods with a focus on the incorporation of TL in HAR methods. It also discusses the limitations, challenges and possible future directions for more research.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it