Enhancing Human Activity Recognition with Siamese Networks: A Comparative Study of Contrastive and Triplet Learning Approaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper delves into the realm of human activity recognition (HAR) by leveraging the capabilities of Siamese neural networks (SNNs), focusing on the comparative effectiveness of contrastive and triplet learning approaches. Against the backdrop of HAR’s growing importance in healthcare, sports, and smart environments, the need for advanced models capable of accurately recognizing and classifying complex human activities has become paramount. Addressing this, we have introduced a Siamese network architecture integrated with convolutional neural networks (CNNs) for spatial feature extraction, bidirectional LSTM (Bi-LSTM) for temporal dependency capture, and attention mechanisms to prioritize salient features. Employing both contrastive and triplet loss functions, we meticulously analyze the impact of these learning approaches on the network’s ability to generate discriminative embeddings for HAR tasks. Through extensive experimentation, the study reveals that Siamese networks, particularly those utilizing triplet loss functions, demonstrate superior performance in activity recognition accuracy and F1 scores compared with baseline deep learning models. The inclusion of a stacking meta-classifier further amplifies classification efficacy, showcasing the robustness and adaptability of our proposed model. Conclusively, our findings underscore the potential of Siamese networks with advanced learning paradigms in enhancing HAR systems, paving the way for future research in model optimization and application expansion.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".