Citation link: 10.3389/fcomp.2024.1379788
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
A_matter_of_annotation.pdf2.36 MBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open
Dokument Type: Article
metadata.dc.title: A matter of annotation: an empirical study on in situ and self-recall activity annotations from wearable sensors
Authors: Hölzemann, Alexander 
Van Laerhoven, Kristof 
Institute: Department Elektrotechnik - Informatik 
Free keywords: Data annotation ambiguity, Data labeling, Deep learning, Dataset, Annotation method, Mehrdeutigkeit von Datenkommentaren, Datenbeschriftung, Tiefes Lernen, Datensatz, Annotationsmethode
Dewey Decimal Classification: 004 Informatik
Issue Date: 2024
Publish Date: 2024
Source: Frontiers in computer science ; Vol. 6, 1379788. - https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomp.2024.1379788
Abstract: 
Research into the detection of human activities from wearable sensors is a highly active field, benefiting numerous applications, from ambulatory monitoring of healthcare patients via fitness coaching to streamlining manual work processes. We present an empirical study that evaluates and contrasts four commonly employed annotation methods in user studies focused on in-thewild data collection. For both the user-driven, in situ annotations, where participants annotate their activities during the actual recording process, and the recall methods, where participants retrospectively annotate their data at the end of each day, the participants had the flexibility to select their own set of activity classes and corresponding labels. Our study illustrates that different labeling methodologies directly impact the annotations' quality, as well as the capabilities of a deep learning classifier trained with the data. We noticed that in situ methods produce less but more precise labels than recall methods. Furthermore, we combined an activity diary with a visualization tool that enables the participant to inspect and label their activity data. Due to the introduction of such a tool were able to decrease missing annotations and increase the annotation consistency, and therefore the F1-Score of the deep learning model by up to 8% (ranging between 82.1 and 90.4 % F1-Score). Furthermore, we discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the methods compared in our study, the biases they could introduce, and the consequences of their usage on human activity recognition studies as well as possible solutions.
Description: 
Finanziert aus dem DFG-geförderten Open-Access-Publikationsfonds der Universität Siegen für Zeitschriftenartikel
DOI: 10.3389/fcomp.2024.1379788
URN: urn:nbn:de:hbz:467-27652
URI: https://dspace.ub.uni-siegen.de/handle/ubsi/2765
License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Appears in Collections:Geförderte Open-Access-Publikationen

This item is protected by original copyright

Show full item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons