In-sensor human gait analysis with machine learning in a wearable microfabricated accelerometer
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In-sensor computing could become a fundamentally new approach to the deployment of machine learning in small devices that must operate securely with limited energy resources, such as wearable medical devices and devices for the Internet of Things. Progress in this field has been slowed by the difficulty to find appropriate computing devices that operate using physical degrees of freedom that can be coupled directly to degrees of freedom that perform sensing. Here we leverage reservoir computing as a natural framework to do machine learning with the degrees of freedom of a physical system, to show that a micro-electromechanical system can implement computing and the sensing of accelerations by coupling the displacement of suspended microstructures. We present a complete wearable system that can be attached to the foot to identify the gait patterns of human subjects in real-time. The computing efficiency and the power consumption of this in-sensor computing system is then compared to a conventional system with a separate sensor and digital computer. For similar computing capabilities, a much better power efficiency can be expected for the highly-integrated in-sensor computing devices, thus providing a path for the ubiquitous deployment of machine learning in edge computing devices.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
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 it