A Dataset of Food Intake Activities Using Sensors with Heterogeneous Privacy Sensitivity Levels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human activity recognition, which involves recognizing human activities from sensor data, has drawn a lot of interest from researchers and practitioners as a result of the advent of smart homes, smart cities, and smart systems. Existing studies on activity recognition mostly concentrate on coarse-grained activities like walking and jumping, while fine-grained activities like eating and drinking are understudied because it is more difficult to recognize fine-grained activities than coarse-grained ones. As such, food intake activity recognition in particular is under investigation in the literature despite its importance for human health and well-being, including telehealth and diet management. In order to determine sensors' practical recognition accuracy, preferably with the least amount of privacy intrusion, a dataset of food intake activities utilizing sensors with varying degrees of privacy sensitivity is required. In this study, we collected such a dataset by collecting fine-grained food intake activities using sensors of heterogeneous privacy sensitivity levels, namely a mmWave radar, an RGB camera, and a depth camera. Solutions to recognize food intake activities can be developed using this dataset, which may provide a more comprehensive picture of the accuracy and privacy trade-offs involved with heterogeneous sensors.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".