MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391899109 · doi:10.1186/s12938-024-01213-3

The effectiveness of simple heuristic features in sensor orientation and placement problems in human activity recognition using a single smartphone accelerometer

2024· article· en· W4391899109 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBioMedical Engineering OnLine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicContext-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatchewan HealthMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAccelerometerOrientation (vector space)HeuristicComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer visionActivity recognitionPosition (finance)SittingPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Human activity Recognition (HAR) using smartphone sensors suffers from two major problems: sensor orientation and placement. Sensor orientation and sensor placement problems refer to the variation in sensor signal for a particular activity due to sensors' altering orientation and placement. Extracting orientation and position invariant features from raw sensor signals is a simple solution for tackling these problems. Using few heuristic features rather than numerous time-domain and frequency-domain features offers more simplicity in this approach. The heuristic features are features which have very minimal effects of sensor orientation and placement. In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of four simple heuristic features in solving the sensor orientation and placement problems using a 1D-CNN-LSTM model for a data set consisting of over 12 million samples. METHODS: We accumulated data from 42 participants for six common daily activities: Lying, Sitting, Walking, and Running at 3-Metabolic Equivalent of Tasks (METs), 5-METs and 7-METs from a single accelerometer sensor of a smartphone. We conducted our study for three smartphone positions: Pocket, Backpack and Hand. We extracted simple heuristic features from the accelerometer data and used them to train and test a 1D-CNN-LSTM model to evaluate their effectiveness in solving sensor orientation and placement problems. RESULTS: We performed intra-position and inter-position evaluations. In intra-position evaluation, we trained and tested the model using data from the same smartphone position, whereas, in inter-position evaluation, the training and test data was from different smartphone positions. For intra-position evaluation, we acquired 70-73% accuracy; for inter-position cases, the accuracies ranged between 59 and 69%. Moreover, we performed participant-specific and activity-specific analyses. CONCLUSIONS: We found that the simple heuristic features are considerably effective in solving orientation problems. With further development, such as fusing the heuristic features with other methods that eliminate placement issues, we can also achieve a better result than the outcome we achieved using the heuristic features for the sensor placement problem. In addition, we found the heuristic features to be more effective in recognizing high-intensity activities.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.808
Threshold uncertainty score0.419

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.254 · 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