WEARABLE INERTIAL SENSORS AND DEEP LEARNING TO DETECT CLINICALLY MEANINGFUL REAL-WORLD WALKING SURFACE CHARACTERISTICS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction The ability to walk over various surfaces such as cobblestones, slopes or stairs is a very patient centric and clinically meaningful mobility outcome. Current wearable sensors only measure step counts or walking speed regardless of such context relevant for assessing gait function. This study aims to improve deep learning (DL) models to classify surfaces of walking by altering and comparing model features and sensor configurations. Method Using a public dataset, signals from 6 IMUs (Movella DOT) worn on various body locations (trunk, wrist, right/left thigh, right/left shank) of 30 subjects walking on 9 surfaces were analyzed (flat ground, ramps (up/down), stairs (up/down), cobblestones (irregular), grass (soft), banked (left/right)). Two variations of a CNN Bi-directional LSTM model, with different Batch Normalization layer placement (beginning vs end) as well as data reduction to individual sensors (versus combined) were explored and model performance compared in-between and with previous models using F1 scores. Result The Bi-LSTM architecture improved performance over previous models, especially for subject-wise data splitting and when combining the 6 sensor locations (e.g. F1=0.94 versus 0.77). Placement of the Batch Normalization layer at the beginning, prior to the convolutional layer, enhanced model understanding of participant gait variations across surfaces. Single sensor performance was best on the right shank (F1=0.88). Conclusion Walking surface detection using wearable IMUs and DL models shows promise for clinically relevant real-world applications, achieving high F1 levels (>0.9) even for subject-wise data splitting enhancing the model applicability in real-world scenarios. Normalization techniques, such as Batch Normalization, seem crucial for optimizing model performance across diverse participant data. Also single-sensor set-ups can give acceptable performance, in particular for specific surface types of potentially high clinical relevance (e.g. stairs, ramps), offering practical and cost-effective solutions with high usability. Future research will focus on collecting ground-truth labeled data to investigate system performance in real-world settings.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".