Domain Adaptation Methods for Lab-to-Field Human Context Recognition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human context recognition (HCR) using sensor data is a crucial task in Context-Aware (CA) applications in domains such as healthcare and security. Supervised machine learning HCR models are trained using smartphone HCR datasets that are scripted or gathered in-the-wild. Scripted datasets are most accurate because of their consistent visit patterns. Supervised machine learning HCR models perform well on scripted datasets but poorly on realistic data. In-the-wild datasets are more realistic, but cause HCR models to perform worse due to data imbalance, missing or incorrect labels, and a wide variety of phone placements and device types. Lab-to-field approaches learn a robust data representation from a scripted, high-fidelity dataset, which is then used for enhancing performance on a noisy, in-the-wild dataset with similar labels. This research introduces Triplet-based Domain Adaptation for Context REcognition (Triple-DARE), a lab-to-field neural network method that combines three unique loss functions to enhance intra-class compactness and inter-class separation within the embedding space of multi-labeled datasets: (1) domain alignment loss in order to learn domain-invariant embeddings; (2) classification loss to preserve task-discriminative features; and (3) joint fusion triplet loss. Rigorous evaluations showed that Triple-DARE achieved 6.3% and 4.5% higher F1-score and classification, respectively, than state-of-the-art HCR baselines and outperformed non-adaptive HCR models by 44.6% and 10.7%, respectively.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
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.
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".