MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3210766530 · doi:10.3390/s22041476

Deep Learning in Human Activity Recognition with Wearable Sensors: A Review on Advances

2022· review· en· W3210766530 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicContext-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWearable computerActivity recognitionDeep learningHuman–computer interactionWearable technologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mobile and wearable devices have enabled numerous applications, including activity tracking, wellness monitoring, and human-computer interaction, that measure and improve our daily lives. Many of these applications are made possible by leveraging the rich collection of low-power sensors found in many mobile and wearable devices to perform human activity recognition (HAR). Recently, deep learning has greatly pushed the boundaries of HAR on mobile and wearable devices. This paper systematically categorizes and summarizes existing work that introduces deep learning methods for wearables-based HAR and provides a comprehensive analysis of the current advancements, developing trends, and major challenges. We also present cutting-edge frontiers and future directions for deep learning-based HAR.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.251 · 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