Search

Annotating accelerometer-based physical activity data remains a challenging task, limiting the creation of robust supervised machine learning models due to the scarcity of large, labeled, free-living human activity recognition (HAR) datasets. Researchers are exploring self-supervised learning (SSL) as an alternative to relying solely on labeled data approaches. However, there has been limited exploration of the impact of large-scale, unlabeled datasets for SSL pre-training on downstream HAR performance, particularly utilizing more than one accelerometer. To address this gap, a transformer encoder network is pre-trained on various amounts of unlabeled, dual-accelerometer data from the HUNT4 dataset: 10, 100, 1k, 10k, and 100k hours. The objective is to reconstruct masked segments of signal spectrograms. This pre-trained model, termed SelfPAB, serves as a feature extractor for downstream supervised HAR training across five datasets (HARTH, HAR70+, PAMAP2, Opportunity, and RealWorld). SelfPAB outperforms purely supervised baselines and other SSL methods, demonstrating notable enhancements, especially for activities with limited training data. Results show that more pre-training data improves downstream HAR performance, with the 100k-hour model exhibiting the highest performance. It surpasses purely supervised baselines by absolute F1-score improvements of 7.1% (HARTH), 14% (HAR70+), and an average of 11.26% across the PAMAP2, Opportunity, and RealWorld datasets. Compared to related SSL methods, SelfPAB displays absolute F1-score enhancements of 10.4% (HARTH), 18.8% (HAR70+), and 16% (average across PAMAP2, Opportunity, RealWorld). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite apparent shortcomings such as measurement error and low precision, self-reported sedentary time is still widely used in surveillance and research. The aim of this study was threefold; (i) to examine the agreement between self-reported and device-measured sitting time in a general adult population; (ii), to examine to what extent demographics, lifestyle factors, long-term health conditions, physical work demands, and educational level is associated with measurement bias; and (iii), to explore whether correcting for factors associated with bias improves the prediction of device-measured sitting time based on self-reported sitting time. Methods: A statistical validation model study based on data from 23 993 adults in the Trøndelag Health Study (HUNT4), Norway. Participants reported usual sitting time on weekdays using a single-item questionnaire and wore two AX3 tri-axial accelerometers on the thigh and low back for an average of 3.8 (standard deviation [SD] 0.7, range 1–5) weekdays to determine their sitting time. Statistical validation was performed by iteratively adding all possible combinations of factors associated with bias between self-reported and device-measured sitting time in a multivariate linear regression. We randomly selected 2/3 of the data (n = 15 995) for model development and used the remaining 1/3 (n = 7 998) to evaluate the model. Results: Mean (SD) self-reported and device-measured sitting time were 6.8 (2.9) h/day and 8.6 (2.2) h/day, respectively, corresponding to a mean difference of 1.8 (3.1) h/day. Limits of agreement ranged from − 8.0 h/day to 4.4 h/day. The discrepancy between the measurements was characterized by a proportional bias with participants device-measured to sit less overestimating their sitting time and participants device-measured to sit more underestimating their sitting time. The crude explained variance of device-measured sitting time based on self-reported sitting time was 10%. This improved to 24% when adding age, body mass index and physical work demands to the model. Adding sex, lifestyle factors, educational level, and long-term health conditions to the model did not improve the explained variance. Conclusions: Self-reported sitting time had low validity and including a range of factors associated with bias in self-reported sitting time only marginally improved the prediction of device-measured sitting time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Activity monitoring combined with machine learning (ML) methods can contribute to detailed knowledge about daily physical behavior in older adults. The current study (1) evaluated the performance of an existing activity type recognition ML model (HARTH), based on data from healthy young adults, for classifying daily physical behavior in fit-to-frail older adults, (2) compared the performance with a ML model (HAR70+) that included training data from older adults, and (3) evaluated the ML models on older adults with and without walking aids. Eighteen older adults aged 70–95 years who ranged widely in physical function, including usage of walking aids, were equipped with a chest-mounted camera and two accelerometers during a semi-structured free-living protocol. Labeled accelerometer data from video analysis was used as ground truth for the classification of walking, standing, sitting, and lying identified by the ML models. Overall accuracy was high for both the HARTH model (91%) and the HAR70+ model (94%). The performance was lower for those using walking aids in both models, however, the overall accuracy improved from 87% to 93% in the HAR70+ model. The validated HAR70+ model contributes to more accurate classification of daily physical behavior in older adults that is essential for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]