Fall risk assessment dataset: older-adult participants undergoing the time up and go test
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents a dataset comprising signal data collected from Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) sensors during the administration of the Time Up and Go (TUG) test for assessing fall risk in older adults. The dataset is divided into two main sections. The first section contains personal, behavioral, and health-related data from 34 participants. The second section contains signal data from tri-axial acceleration and tri-axial gyroscope sensors embedded in an IMU sensor, which was affixed to the participants' waist area to capture signal data while they walked. The chosen assessment method for fall risk analysis is the TUG test, requiring participants to walk a 3-meter distance back and forth. To prepare the dataset for subsequent analysis, the raw signal data underwent processing to extract only the walking periods during the TUG test. Additionally, a low-pass filter technique was employed to reduce noise interference. This dataset holds the potential for the development of effective models for fall risk detection based on insights garnered from questionnaires administered to specialists who observed the experiments. The dataset also contains anonymized participant information that can be explored to investigate fall risk, along with other health-related conditions or behaviors that could influence the risk of falling. This information is invaluable for devising tailored treatment or rehabilitation plans for individual older adults. The complete dataset is accessible through the Mendeley repository."
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".