Cited by 259Digital Transformation in IndustryInternet of Things and AIContext-Aware Activity Recognition Systems

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 109 of the 114 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 2 are not checked yet.

Human Digital Twin for Fitness Management

Open access

Abstract

Our research work describes a team of human Digital Twins (DTs), each tracking fitness-related measurements describing an athlete's behavior in consecutive days (e.g. food income, activity, sleep). After collecting enough measurements, the DT firstly predicts the physical twin performance during training and, in case of non-optimal result, it suggests modifications in the athlete's behavior. The athlete's team is integrated into SmartFit, a software framework for supporting trainers and coaches in monitoring and manage athletes' fitness activity and results. Through IoT sensors embedded in wearable devices and applications for manual logging (e.g. mood, food income), SmartFit continuously captures measurements, initially treated as the dynamic data describing the current physical twins' status. Dynamic data allows adapting each DT's status and triggering the DT's predictions and suggestions. The analyzed measurements are stored as the historical data, further processed by the DT to update (increase) its knowledge and ability to provide reliable predictions. Results show that, thanks to the team of DTs, SmartFit computes trustable predictions of the physical twins' conditions and produces understandable suggestions which can be used by trainers to trigger optimization actions in the athletes' behavior. Though applied in the sport context, SmartFit can be easily adapted to other monitoring tasks.

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 · 10.1109/access.2020.2971576

Cites

109 of 111 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

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?

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 114 references

3 of the 114 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 19

  1. 2019, The Living Heart Project
  2. holtmannspotter, 2017, Simulation in clinical practice: First experience with Sim&Cure before implantation of flow diverter (pipeline) or Web-device for the treatment of intracranial aneurysm, Proc ABC/WIN
  3. 2015, Data-Driven Treatments as Unique as Your Own Body
  4. 2019, What is Precision Medicine?
  5. scharff, 2010, From Digital Twin to Improved Patient Experience Siemens Healthineers
  6. polyniak, 2016, The Johns Hopkins Hospital Launches Capacity Command Center to Enhance Hospital Operations John Hopkins Medicine
  7. 0, Network modeling of patients’ biomolecular profiles for clinical phenotype/outcome prediction, Sci Rep
  8. merz, 1998, UCI Repository of Machine Learning Datasets
  9. 10.1007/BF00116835 · DOI
  10. karegowda, 2012, Cascading K-means clustering and K-nearest neighbor classifier for categorization of diabetic patients, Int J Eng Adv Technol, 1, 147
  11. watcher, 2017, Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR, arXiv 1711 00399
  12. wang, 2015, Or’s of and’s for interpretable classification, with application to context-aware recommender systems, arXiv 1504 07614
  13. mitchell, 1997, Machine Learning
  14. ribeiro, 2018, High-precision model-agnostic explanations, Proc AAAI Conf Artif Intell (AAAI)
  15. 2020, The Ill-Fated Space Odyssey of Apollo 13
  16. 10.1007/s12652-018-0953-6 · DOI
  17. 10.2307/2286009 · DOI · Paper page
  18. 10.2307/2280779 · DOI
  19. molnar, 2019, Interpretable Machine Learning A Guide for Making Black Box Models Explainable

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 258

Metadata

Authors
Barricelli, B. R., Casiraghi, E., Gliozzo, J., Petrini, A., & Valtolina, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Brescia (IT)
  • University of Milan (IT)
  • Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico (IT)
Venue
IEEE Access
Published
2020
Volume
8
Pages
26637-26664
ISSN
2169-3536 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3004825562
Cited by
259
References
114
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 58 · 2024: 60 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 47 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 8
FWCI
18.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Access (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Archivio Istituzionale della Ricerca (Universita Degli Studi Di Milano) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Institutional Research Information System (Università degli Studi di Brescia) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Bando Sostegno alla Ricerca 2019 through the University of Milan
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Digital Transformation in Industry
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Internet of Things and AI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Context-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
Keywords
human digital twin, wearable sensors, Internet of Things, dynamic data, dietary monitoring, sleep monitoring, activity monitoring

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