An Evaluation of the Effect of App-Based Exercise Prescription Using Reinforcement Learning on Satisfaction and Exercise Intensity: Randomized Crossover Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The increasing prevalence of sedentary lifestyles has prompted the development of innovative public health interventions, such as smartphone apps that deliver personalized exercise programs. The widespread availability of mobile technologies (eg, smartphone apps and wearable activity trackers) provides a cost-effective, scalable way to remotely deliver personalized exercise programs to users. Using machine learning (ML), specifically reinforcement learning (RL), may enhance user engagement and effectiveness of these programs by tailoring them to individual preferences and needs. Objective: The primary aim was to investigate the impact of the Samsung-developed i80 BPM app, implementing ML for exercise prescription, on user satisfaction and exercise intensity among the general population. The secondary objective was to assess the effectiveness of ML-generated exercise programs for remote prescription of exercise to members of the public. Methods: Participants were randomized to complete 3 exercise sessions per week for 12 weeks using the i80 BPM mobile app, crossing over weekly between intervention and control conditions. The intervention condition involved individualizing exercise sessions using RL, based on user preferences such as exercise difficulty, selection, and intensity, whereas under the control condition, exercise sessions were not individualized. Exercise intensity (measured by the 10-item Borg scale) and user satisfaction (measured by the 8-item version of the Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale) were recorded after the session. Results: In total, 62 participants (27 male and 42 female participants; mean age 43, SD 13 years) completed 559 exercise sessions over 12 weeks (9 sessions per participant). Generalized estimating equations showed that participants were more likely to exercise at a higher intensity (intervention: mean intensity 5.82, 95% CI 5.59-6.05 and control: mean intensity 5.19, 95% CI 4.97-5.41) and report higher satisfaction (RL: mean satisfaction 4, 95% CI 3.9-4.1 and baseline: mean satisfaction 3.73, 95% CI 3.6-3.8) in the RL model condition. Conclusions: The findings suggest that RL can effectively increase both the intensity with which people exercise and their enjoyment of the sessions, highlighting the potential of ML to enhance remote exercise interventions. This study underscores the benefits of personalized exercise prescriptions in increasing adherence and satisfaction, which are crucial for the long-term effectiveness of fitness programs. Further research is warranted to explore the long-term impacts and potential scalability of RL-enhanced exercise apps in diverse populations. This study contributes to the understanding of digital health interventions in exercise science, suggesting that personalized, app-based exercise prescriptions may be more effective than traditional, nonpersonalized methods. The integration of RL into exercise apps could significantly impact public health, particularly in enhancing engagement and reducing the global burden of physical inactivity.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".