ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Participant-Independent Recognition of 22 Upper-Body Movements Using Wearable IMUs: A Controlled Pilot Study Toward Fine-Grained Industrial HAR.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Future industrial human activity recognition (HAR) may require discrimination among many operational elements, including movements with partially overlapping kinematics. This controlled pilot study characterized recognition across 22 upper-body movement classes with varying structural similarity and examined classifier, signal scaling, and temporal window length. Sixteen adults performed the movements with an XSENS motion-capture system; eight upper-limb inertial measurement units provided 80 synchronous time-series channels. Thirteen participants were used for model development, and three whose observed execution patterns differed comparatively from the remainder were deliberately reserved as a challenge-oriented holdout. Support vector classifier (SVC), random forest (RF), Gaussian naive Bayes (NB), and long short-term memory (LSTM) models were evaluated with min-max or maximum-absolute scaling and 62-, 93-, or 124-frame windows. RF with maximum-absolute scaling and a 124-frame window achieved the best aggregate holdout performance (accuracy = 0.950; F1 = 0.939). Importantly, this performance was obtained on three entirely unseen participants who were deliberately reserved because their observed execution patterns and fluency differed from those of the model-development participants, providing a controlled, challenge-oriented test of transfer across inter-individual execution variability. Nevertheless, strong aggregate performance did not translate into uniform class-level reliability, and prominent errors remained concentrated in specific movement pairs. These findings provide empirical evidence for both the participant-independent transfer capability and the class-specific limitations of motion-only recognition, supporting its role as a methodological precursor to future AI-assisted work study and human-robot collaboration rather than as evidence of end-to-end industrial HAR.
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.