Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34883863›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2021

HARTH: A Human Activity Recognition Dataset for Machine Learning.

Aleksej Logacjov, Kerstin Bach, Atle Kongsvold, Hilde Bremseth Bårdstu, Paul Jarle Mork

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Movement Behaviors in Youth on the Autism Spectrum: The HUNT Study, Norway.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Towards Practical, Best Practice Video Annotation to Support Human Activity Recognition.Annotation of real-world data for artificial intelligence systems : 9th international workshop, ARDUOUS 2025, Bologna Italy, October 25-26, 2025, proceedings. International Workshop on Annotation of Real-World Data for Artificial Intell... · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Aleksej LogacjovDepartment of Computer Science, Faculty of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7034 Trondheim, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-8834-1744
Kerstin BachDepartment of Computer Science, Faculty of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7034 Trondheim, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-4256-7676
Atle KongsvoldDepartment of Public Health and Nursing, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7034 Trondheim, Norway.ORCID 0000-0003-4887-8288
Hilde Bremseth BårdstuDepartment of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7034 Trondheim, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-1167-2852
Paul Jarle MorkDepartment of Public Health and Nursing, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7034 Trondheim, Norway.ORCID 0000-0003-3355-2680

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Existing accelerometer-based human activity recognition (HAR) benchmark datasets that were recorded during free living suffer from non-fixed sensor placement, the usage of only one sensor, and unreliable annotations. We make two contributions in this work. First, we present the publicly available Human Activity Recognition Trondheim dataset (HARTH). Twenty-two participants were recorded for 90 to 120 min during their regular working hours using two three-axial accelerometers, attached to the thigh and lower back, and a chest-mounted camera. Experts annotated the data independently using the camera's video signal and achieved high inter-rater agreement (Fleiss' Kappa =0.96). They labeled twelve activities. The second contribution of this paper is the training of seven different baseline machine learning models for HAR on our dataset. We used a support vector machine, k-nearest neighbor, random forest, extreme gradient boost, convolutional neural network, bidirectional long short-term memory, and convolutional neural network with multi-resolution blocks. The support vector machine achieved the best results with an F1-score of 0.81 (standard deviation: ±0.18), recall of 0.85±0.13, and precision of 0.79±0.22 in a leave-one-subject-out cross-validation. Our highly professional recordings and annotations provide a promising benchmark dataset for researchers to develop innovative machine learning approaches for precise HAR in free living.

Indexed as

Human ActivitiesMachine LearningHumansNeural Networks, ComputerRecognition, PsychologySupport Vector Machineaccelerometerbenchmarkdeep learninghuman activity recognitionmachine learningphysical activity behaviorpublic dataset

Identifiers

PMID34883863
PMCPMC8659926

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.