Cited by 45Context-Aware Activity Recognition SystemsHuman Pose and Action RecognitionBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention

Dataset for human fall recognition in an uncontrolled environment

Open access
Guerrero, José Camilo Eraso, España, Elena Muñoz, Añasco, Mariela Muñoz, Lopera, Jesús Emilio Pinto·2022·Data in Brief

Abstract

This article presents a dataset (CAUCAFall) with ten subjects, which simulates five types of falls and five types of activities of daily living (ADLs). Specifically, the data include forward falls, backward falls, lateral falls left, lateral falls right, and falls arising from sitting. The participants performed the following ADLs: walking, hopping, picking up an object, sitting, and kneeling. The dataset considers individuals of different ages, weights, heights, and dominant legs. The data were acquired using an RGB camera in a home environment. This environment was intentionally realistic and included uncontrolled features, such as occlusions, lighting changes (natural, artificial, and night), participants different clothing, movement in the background, different textures on the floor and in the room, and a variety in fall angles and different distances from the camera to the fall. The dataset consists of 10 folders, one for each subject, and each folder includes ten subfolders with the performed activities. Each folder contains the video of the action and all the images of that action. CAUCAFall is the only database that contains details of the lighting lux of the scenarios, the distances from the human fall to the camera and the angles of the different falls with reference to the camera. The dataset is also the only one that contains labels for each image. Frames including human falls recorded were labeled as ``fall'', and ADL activities were marked ``nofall". This dataset is useful for developing and evaluating modern fall recognition algorithms, such as those that apply feature extraction, convolutional neural networks with YOLOv3-v4 detectors, and camera location and resolution increase the performance of algorithms such as OPENPOSE. Thus, the dataset enables knowledge of the real progress of research in this area since existing datasets are used in strictly controlled environments. The authors intend to contribute a dataset with real-world housing environments characteristics.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.dib.2022.108610

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • This approach preserved the natural variability of children's movements, addressing a common limitation in fall detection datasets, which often rely on simulated falls in sterile environments.

    “This approach preserved the natural variability of children’s movements, addressing a common limitation in fall detection datasets, which often rely on simulated falls in sterile environments [9].”

    From Safe Fall: Use of Predictive Modeling and Machine Vision Techniques for Fall Analysis and Fall Quality (2026) · cites this paper as [9]

    The Value of the Data section says fall-detection datasets often use restricted environments and simulated falls, supporting the stated limitation. The Data collection protocol describes an uncontrolled home setting with varied conditions, but it does not discuss children or establish that this approach preserved the natural variability of children’s movements; its participants simulated falls. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [12]Zhang Z Conly C Athitsos V Evaluating depth-based computer vision methods for fall detection under occlusions International Symposium on Visual Computing 2014 Springer 196 207
  2. [15]Adhikari K Hamid B Hammadi N Activity recognition for indoor fall detection using convolutional neural network, machine vision applications (MVA) Proceedings of the 2017 Fifteenth IAPR International Conference on 2017 IEEE

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Guerrero, J. C. E., España, E. M., Añasco, M. M., & Lopera, J. E. P.
Affiliations
  • Universidad del Cauca (CO)
  • Universidad de la Amazonia (CO)
Corresponding author
Guerrero, José Camilo Eraso
Venue
Data in Brief
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-12
Volume
45
Pages
108610
ISSN
2352-3409 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4296143945
Cited by
45
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 4
Type
data paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Data in Brief (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Universidad del Cauca
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Context-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Human Pose and Action Recognition
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Keywords
activities of daily living, RGB video, uncontrolled environments, occlusion, lighting conditions, camera distance, fall detection, family environment, image annotation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review