ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Significant Features for Human Activity Recognition Using Tri-Axial Accelerometers.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intelligent Sports Weights.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Latent Space Representation of Human Movement: Assessing the Effects of Fatigue.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Robust human locomotion and localization activity recognition over multisensory.Frontiers in physiology · 2024Article
- Accuracy and Reliability of a Suite of Digital Measures of Walking Generated Using a Wrist-Worn Sensor in Healthy Individuals: Performance Characterization Study.JMIR human factors · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Activity recognition using wearable sensors has become essential for a variety of applications. Tri-axial accelerometers are the most widely used sensor for activity recognition. Although various features have been used to capture patterns and classify the accelerometer signals to recognise activities, there is no consensus on the best features to choose. Reducing the number of features can reduce the computational cost and complexity and enhance the performance of the classifiers. This paper identifies the signal features that have significant discriminative power between different human activities. It also investigates the effect of sensor placement location, the sampling frequency, and activity complexity on the selected features. A comprehensive list of 193 signal features has been extracted from accelerometer signals of four publicly available datasets, including features that have never been used before for activity recognition. Feature significance was measured using the Joint Mutual Information Maximisation (JMIM) method. Common significant features among all the datasets were identified. The results show that the sensor placement location does not significantly affect recognition performance, nor does it affect the significant sub-set of features. The results also showed that with high sampling frequency, features related to signal repeatability and regularity show high discriminative power.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.