MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6939482674 · doi:10.60692/x3rmk-z7627

Long Short Term Memory Based Model for Abnormal Behavior Prediction in Elderly Persons

2019· article· en· W6939482674 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversité TÉLUQ
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbnormalityLong short term memoryActivities of daily livingElderly peopleIntervention (counseling)Artificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Smart home refers to the independency and comfort that are ensured by remote monitoring and assistive services. Assisting an elderly person requires identifying and accurately predicting his/her normal and abnormal behaviors. Abnormal behaviors observed during the completion of activities of daily living are a good indicator that the person is more likely to have health and behavioral problems that need intervention and assistance. In this paper, we propose a method, based on long short-term memory recurrent neural networks (LSTM), to automatically predicting an elderly person's abnormal behaviors. Our method allows to model the temporal information expressed in the long sequences collected over time. Our study aims to evaluate the performance of LSTM on identifying and predicting elderly persons abnormal behaviors in smart homes. We experimentally demonstrated, through extensive experiments using a dataset, the suitability and performance of the proposed method in predicting abnormal behaviors with high accuracy. We also demonstrated the superiority of the proposed method compared to the existing state-of-the-art methods.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information System→Same topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions→French-language works237,207→