MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Federated Learning for Hierarchical Fall Detection and Human Activity Recognition

2024· article· en· W4405908240 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Febrianto Afandy, Pai Chet Ng, Konstantinos N. Plataniotis

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicContext-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersMinistry of Education
KeywordsComputer scienceActivity recognitionArtificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In healthcare monitoring, precise fall detection (FD) and human activity recognition (HAR) are paramount, especially for the elderly. This paper presents a federated learning (FL) framework that employs a two-stage hierarchical approach to address these needs. The first stage distinguishes between fall and non-fall events, crucial for minimizing false alarms in sensitive environments such as elderly care facilities. Subsequently, if a fall is detected, the system classifies the type of fall to facilitate appropriate medical responses; if no fall is detected, it classifies the specific activity being performed. This approach enables accurate emergency responses and supports personalized healthcare interventions. With FL, all model training are conducted on local devices using wearable data, including inertial measurement unit (IMU) and physiological signals, without the need to share sensitive data centrally, preserving users’ privacy. This method ensures that each device contributes to a global model, whilst maintaining the confidentiality of individual data inputs. Our experimental evaluations demonstrate generalization capabilities in binary classification for FD and highlight challenges in multi-class scenarios for HAR, demonstrating the need for advanced strategies in handling complex classifications. The source code and experimental evaluations are accessible at https://github.com/SIT-FL/FL-Fall-Detection.

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 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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.816

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicContext-Aware Activity Recognition SystemsFrench-language works237,207