基于传感器的回合检测算法的性能评估:过渡配对法。

Paul R Hibbing, Samuel R LaMunion, Haileab Hilafu, Scott E Crouter
{"title":"基于传感器的回合检测算法的性能评估:过渡配对法。","authors":"Paul R Hibbing,&nbsp;Samuel R LaMunion,&nbsp;Haileab Hilafu,&nbsp;Scott E Crouter","doi":"10.1123/jmpb.2019-0039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Bout detection algorithms are used to segment data from wearable sensors, but it is challenging to assess segmentation correctness.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To present and demonstrate the Transition Pairing Method (TPM), a new method for evaluating the performance of bout detection algorithms.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The TPM compares predicted transitions to a criterion measure in terms of number and timing. A true positive is defined as a predicted transition that corresponds with one criterion transition in a mutually exclusive pair. The pairs are established using an extended Gale-Shapley algorithm, and the user specifies a maximum allowable within-pair time lag, above which pairs cannot be formed. Unpaired predictions and criteria are false positives and false negatives, respectively. The demonstration used raw acceleration data from 88 youth who wore ActiGraph GT9X monitors (right hip and non-dominant wrist) during simulated free-living. Youth Sojourn bout detection algorithms were applied (one for each attachment site), and the TPM was used to compare predicted bout transitions to the criterion measure (direct observation). Performance metrics were calculated for each participant, and hip-versus-wrist means were compared using paired T-tests (α = 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>When the maximum allowable lag was 1-s, both algorithms had recall <20% (2.4% difference from one another, p<0.01) and precision <10% (1.4% difference from one another, p<0.001). That is, >80% of criterion transitions were undetected, and >90% of predicted transitions were false positives.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The TPM improves on conventional analyses by providing specific information about bout detection in a standardized way that applies to any bout detection algorithm.</p>","PeriodicalId":73572,"journal":{"name":"Journal for the measurement of physical behaviour","volume":" ","pages":"219-227"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8274497/pdf/nihms-1599163.pdf","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the Performance of Sensor-based Bout Detection Algorithms: The Transition Pairing Method.\",\"authors\":\"Paul R Hibbing,&nbsp;Samuel R LaMunion,&nbsp;Haileab Hilafu,&nbsp;Scott E Crouter\",\"doi\":\"10.1123/jmpb.2019-0039\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Bout detection algorithms are used to segment data from wearable sensors, but it is challenging to assess segmentation correctness.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To present and demonstrate the Transition Pairing Method (TPM), a new method for evaluating the performance of bout detection algorithms.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The TPM compares predicted transitions to a criterion measure in terms of number and timing. A true positive is defined as a predicted transition that corresponds with one criterion transition in a mutually exclusive pair. The pairs are established using an extended Gale-Shapley algorithm, and the user specifies a maximum allowable within-pair time lag, above which pairs cannot be formed. Unpaired predictions and criteria are false positives and false negatives, respectively. The demonstration used raw acceleration data from 88 youth who wore ActiGraph GT9X monitors (right hip and non-dominant wrist) during simulated free-living. Youth Sojourn bout detection algorithms were applied (one for each attachment site), and the TPM was used to compare predicted bout transitions to the criterion measure (direct observation). Performance metrics were calculated for each participant, and hip-versus-wrist means were compared using paired T-tests (α = 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>When the maximum allowable lag was 1-s, both algorithms had recall <20% (2.4% difference from one another, p<0.01) and precision <10% (1.4% difference from one another, p<0.001). That is, >80% of criterion transitions were undetected, and >90% of predicted transitions were false positives.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The TPM improves on conventional analyses by providing specific information about bout detection in a standardized way that applies to any bout detection algorithm.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73572,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal for the measurement of physical behaviour\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"219-227\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8274497/pdf/nihms-1599163.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal for the measurement of physical behaviour\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1123/jmpb.2019-0039\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2020/5/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for the measurement of physical behaviour","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/jmpb.2019-0039","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/5/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

Bout检测算法用于分割可穿戴传感器的数据,但很难评估分割的正确性。目的:提出并论证了一种评估回合检测算法性能的新方法——过渡配对法(TPM)。方法:TPM在数量和时间方面将预测的过渡与标准度量进行比较。真正定义为与互斥对中的一个标准转换相对应的预测转换。使用扩展的Gale-Shapley算法建立对,用户指定最大允许的对内延迟,超过该延迟将无法形成对。未配对的预测和标准分别是假阳性和假阴性。该演示使用了88名年轻人在模拟自由生活期间佩戴ActiGraph GT9X监视器(右臀部和非主手腕)的原始加速度数据。应用青年旅舍行为检测算法(每个依恋地点一个),并使用TPM将预测的行为转变与标准测量(直接观察)进行比较。计算每位参与者的表现指标,并使用配对t检验比较髋部与手腕的平均值(α = 0.05)。结果:当最大允许延迟为1-s时,两种算法的召回率均为80%的标准转换未被检测到,并且>90%的预测转换为假阳性。结论:TPM通过以一种适用于任何回合检测算法的标准化方式提供关于回合检测的具体信息,从而改进了传统分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluating the Performance of Sensor-based Bout Detection Algorithms: The Transition Pairing Method.

Bout detection algorithms are used to segment data from wearable sensors, but it is challenging to assess segmentation correctness.

Purpose: To present and demonstrate the Transition Pairing Method (TPM), a new method for evaluating the performance of bout detection algorithms.

Methods: The TPM compares predicted transitions to a criterion measure in terms of number and timing. A true positive is defined as a predicted transition that corresponds with one criterion transition in a mutually exclusive pair. The pairs are established using an extended Gale-Shapley algorithm, and the user specifies a maximum allowable within-pair time lag, above which pairs cannot be formed. Unpaired predictions and criteria are false positives and false negatives, respectively. The demonstration used raw acceleration data from 88 youth who wore ActiGraph GT9X monitors (right hip and non-dominant wrist) during simulated free-living. Youth Sojourn bout detection algorithms were applied (one for each attachment site), and the TPM was used to compare predicted bout transitions to the criterion measure (direct observation). Performance metrics were calculated for each participant, and hip-versus-wrist means were compared using paired T-tests (α = 0.05).

Results: When the maximum allowable lag was 1-s, both algorithms had recall <20% (2.4% difference from one another, p<0.01) and precision <10% (1.4% difference from one another, p<0.001). That is, >80% of criterion transitions were undetected, and >90% of predicted transitions were false positives.

Conclusion: The TPM improves on conventional analyses by providing specific information about bout detection in a standardized way that applies to any bout detection algorithm.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Influence of Accelerometer Calibration on the Estimation of Objectively Measured Physical Activity: The Tromsø Study Criterion Validity of Accelerometers in Determining Knee-Flexion Angles During Sitting in a Laboratory Setting Comparability of 24-hr Activity Cycle Outputs From ActiGraph Counts Generated in ActiLife and RStudio Comparison of Sleep and Physical Activity Metrics From Wrist-Worn ActiGraph wGT3X-BT and GT9X Accelerometers During Free-Living in Adults Pre- Versus Postmeal Sedentary Duration—Impact on Postprandial Glucose in Older Adults With Overweight or Obesity
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1