Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 192

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Classification of a known sequence of motions and postures from accelerometry data using adapted Gaussian mixture models

Open access
Allen, Felicity R, Ambikairajah, Eliathamby, Lovell, Nigel H, Celler, Branko G·2006·Physiological Measurement

Abstract

Accelerometry shows promise in providing an inexpensive but effective means of long-term ambulatory monitoring of elderly patients. The accurate classification of everyday movements should allow such a monitoring system to exhibit greater 'intelligence', improving its ability to detect and predict falls by forming a more specific picture of the activities of a person and thereby allowing more accurate tracking of the health parameters associated with those activities. With this in mind, this study aims to develop more robust and effective methods for the classification of postures and motions from data obtained using a single, waist-mounted, triaxial accelerometer; in particular, aiming to improve the flexibility and generality of the monitoring system, making it better able to detect and identify short-duration movements and more adaptable to a specific person or device. Two movement classification methods were investigated: a rule-based Heuristic system and a Gaussian mixture model (GMM)-based system. A novel time-domain feature extraction method is proposed for the GMM system to allow better detection of short-duration movements. A method for adapting the GMMs to compensate for the problem of limited user-specific training data is also proposed and investigated. Classification performance was considered in relation to data gathered in an unsupervised, directed routine conducted in a three-month field trial involving six elderly subjects. The GMM system was found to achieve a mean accuracy of 91.3%, distinguishing between three postures (sitting, standing and lying) and five movements (sit-to-stand, stand-to-sit, lie-to-stand, stand-to-lie and walking), compared to 71.1% achieved by the Heuristic system. The adaptation method was found to offer a mean accuracy of 92.2%; a relative improvement of 20.2% over tests without subject-specific data and 4.5% over tests using only a limited amount of subject-specific data. While limited to a restricted subset of possible motions and postures, these results provide a significant step in the search for a more robust and accurate ambulatory classification system.

Overview

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 · 10.1088/0967-3334/27/10/001

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cited by

See all 192

Metadata

Authors
Allen, F. R., Ambikairajah, E., Lovell, N. H., & Celler, B. G.
Venue
Physiological Measurement
Published
2006-07-25
Volume
27
Issue
10
Pages
935-951
ISSN
  • 0967-3334 (ISSN-L)
  • 1361-6579
OpenAlex
W2151999543
Cited by
192
References
0
FWCI
12.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Classification of a known sequence of motions and postures from accelerometry data using adapted Gaussian mixture models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1088/0967-3334/27/10/001
The paper
Allen, F. R., Ambikairajah, E., Lovell, N. H., & Celler, B. G. (2006). Classification of a known sequence of motions and postures from accelerometry data using adapted Gaussian mixture models. Physiological Measurement. https://doi.org/10.1088/0967-3334/27/10/001

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.