ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Human Activity Recognition Algorithm with Physiological and Inertial Signals Fusion: Photoplethysmography, Electrodermal Activity, and Accelerometry.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Data Reconstruction Methods in Multi-Feature Fusion CNN Model for Enhanced Human Activity Recognition.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Inertial signals are the most widely used signals in human activity recognition (HAR) applications, and extensive research has been performed on developing HAR classifiers using accelerometer and gyroscope data. This study aimed to investigate the potential enhancement of HAR models through the fusion of biological signals with inertial signals. The classification of eight common low-, medium-, and high-intensity activities was assessed using machine learning (ML) algorithms, trained on accelerometer (ACC), blood volume pulse (BVP), and electrodermal activity (EDA) data obtained from a wrist-worn sensor. Two types of ML algorithms were employed: a random forest (RF) trained on features; and a pre-trained deep learning (DL) network (ResNet-18) trained on spectrogram images. Evaluation was conducted on both individual activities and more generalized activity groups, based on similar intensity. Results indicated that RF classifiers outperformed corresponding DL classifiers at both individual and grouped levels. However, the fusion of EDA and BVP signals with ACC data improved DL classifier performance compared to a baseline DL model with ACC-only data. The best performance was achieved by a classifier trained on a combination of ACC, EDA, and BVP images, yielding F1-scores of 69 and 87 for individual and grouped activity classifications, respectively. For DL models trained with additional biological signals, almost all individual activity classifications showed improvement (
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.