MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117456232 · doi:10.1145/3714394.3756207

Summary of SHL Challenge 2025: Locomotion and Transportation Mode Recognition Using Foundation Models

2025· article· W7117456232 on OpenAlexaff
L Wang, Mathias Ciliberto, Hristijan Gjoreski, Paula Lago, Kazuya Murao, Tsuyoshi Okita, Daniel Roggen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicGait Recognition and Analysis
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFoundation (evidence)SoftwareMode (computer interface)Motion (physics)Protocol (science)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper summarizes the contributions of participants to the seventh Sussex-Huawei Locomotion-Transportation (SHL) Recognition Challenge organized at the HASCA Workshop of UbiComp/ISWC 2025. Motivated by the growing interest in foundation models, particularly large language models, this year's edition will explore their application to transportation mode recognition. The goal is to recognize eight locomotion and transportation activities (Still, Walk, Run, Bike, Bus, Car, Train, Subway) from the motion (accelerometer, gyroscope, magnetometer) sensor data of a smartphone in a way which is user-independent and smartphone position-independent. The training data of a ''train'' user is available from smartphones placed at four body positions (Hand, Torso, Bag and Hips). The testing data originates from ''test'' users with a smartphone placed at three body positions (Torso, Bag or Hips). Participants will be required to develop a solution that leverages a recognized and well-established foundation model. We introduce the dataset used in the challenge and the protocol of the competition. We present a meta-analysis of the contributions from 7 submissions, their approaches, the software tools used, computational cost and the achieved results. Overall, three submissions achieved an F1 score between 80% and 90%, two between 70% and 80%, and two below 60%, with a latency of maximum of 5 seconds. The top performance is comparable to the results achieved with non-foundation models in previous challenges.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.662
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.225 · 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.

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGait Recognition and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207