ArticleScientific reports2025
Exploring parameter optimisation in machine learning algorithms for locomotor task discrimination using wearable sensors.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The accurate identification of locomotion states from wearable sensor data using machine learning relies heavily on carefully selecting algorithm parameters, which remains a challenging task. This study systematically optimised key parameters-including window length, sampling frequency, temporal resolution, overlapping value, and normalisation effects-to enhance the accuracy of machine learning models for distinguishing different locomotor tasks. Our study was conducted on participants (N = 35, 19 ♂10 ♀, 27.4 ± 26.5 years, 1.74 ± 0.8 m, 71.5 ± 11.3 kg) who wore accelerometers on the sacrum, thighs and shanks. Principal component and discriminant function analyses were applied to acceleration data from three locomotor tasks: self-selected slow, normal and fast walking. The parameters explored for the optimisation of the algorithm were accelerometer window length, sampling frequency, spectral temporal resolution, overlapping value, and accelerometer amplitude normalisation effects. Unnormalised data, with longer feature window lengths and decreasing temporal resolutions, yielded the highest quality discrimination. Setting the sampling rate to 40 Hz and overlapping value to 66% provided optimal discrimination. Baseline results highlight that the sacrum is the best-performing location, yet optimal (longer) window lengths, and optimal (shorter) temporal resolutions change the best-performing sensor attachment location to the shanks. Specific values of parameters were found to be optimal for our study, and these results can guide manufacturers, engineers, and researchers in designing wearable devices and machine learning algorithms that more effectively identify locomotor tasks. Practitioners and clinicians may also use these findings to select appropriate tools or methodologies tailored to their specific research or clinical objectives.
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.