ArticlePloS one2026
Compact target-aware stability-based feature selection for cross-dataset wearable activity monitoring.
Article in PloS one, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Wearable activity-recognition models may lose reliability when transferred across participants, sensor placements, sampling rates, acquisition protocols, and activity definitions. This study evaluates a compact unsupervised target-aware feature-selection strategy for cross-dataset wearable activity monitoring under a pre-specified MHEALTH→PAMAP2 transfer protocol. Five-second wearable-signal windows were represented using 270 handcrafted inertial and magnetic descriptors. Source-domain mutual-information relevance was then combined with unlabeled source-target descriptor stability to select a compact set of 48 features, after which lightweight classifiers were trained using MHEALTH labels only. The original activities were harmonized into three coarse states: sedentary, active, and vigorous, while harmonized PAMAP2 target labels were withheld from model development and used only for final evaluation. Under leave-one-subject-out evaluation on MHEALTH, the Random Forest classifier achieved 0.9985 accuracy and 0.9984 macro-F1. In the primary cross-dataset experiment, the pre-specified stability-aware configuration achieved 0.9042 accuracy and 0.8753 macro-F1 on PAMAP2, compared with 0.8888 accuracy and 0.8436 macro-F1 for the full 270-feature representation and 0.8734 accuracy and 0.7940 macro-F1 for source-mutual-information-only selection. With all operating values frozen, reverse PAMAP2→MHEALTH transfer also ranked Stable-48 highest (accuracy 0.5811; macro-F1 0.4400), ahead of Source-MI-48 (0.5720; 0.4320) and Full-270 (0.5445; 0.4257), although Holm-adjusted participant-level contrasts were not significant. The compact configuration also achieved higher complete-window accuracy and macro-F1 than the tested shallow target-feature transformations and feature-level MLP adaptation baselines within the same handcrafted descriptor space. These findings indicate that jointly considering source-domain relevance and unlabeled cross-domain descriptor stability can improve compact cross-dataset wearable activity monitoring. The conclusions remain specific to the evaluated protocols and activity taxonomies and do not establish general superiority over raw-signal deep-learning methods or clinical readiness.
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.