Cited by 19Context-Aware Activity Recognition SystemsDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningTime Series Analysis and Forecasting

TS2ACT: Few-Shot Human Activity Sensing with Cross-Modal Co-Learning

Open access
Xia, Kang, Li, Wenzhong, Gan, Shiwei, Lu, Sanglu·2023·Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies

Abstract

Human Activity Recognition (HAR) based on embedded sensor data has become a popular research topic in ubiquitous computing, which has a wide range of practical applications in various fields such as human-computer interaction, healthcare, and motion tracking. Due to the difficulties of annotating sensing data, unsupervised and semi-supervised HAR methods are extensively studied, but their performance gap to the fully-supervised methods is notable. In this paper, we proposed a novel cross-modal co-learning approach called TS2ACT to achieve few-shot HAR. It introduces a cross-modal dataset augmentation method that uses the semantic-rich label text to search for human activity images to form an augmented dataset consisting of partially-labeled time series and fully-labeled images. Then it adopts a pre-trained CLIP image encoder to jointly train with a time series encoder using contrastive learning, where the time series and images are brought closer in feature space if they belong to the same activity class. For inference, the feature extracted from the input time series is compared with the embedding of a pre-trained CLIP text encoder using prompt learning, and the best match is output as the HAR classification results. We conducted extensive experiments on four public datasets to evaluate the performance of the proposed method. The numerical results show that TS2ACT significantly outperforms the state-of-the-art HAR methods, and it achieves performance close to or better than the fully supervised methods even using as few as 1% labeled data for model training. The source codes of TS2ACT are publicly available on GitHub1.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3631445

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 17 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    TS2ACT outperforms the other baseline models by a large margin in all few-shot cases.

    “According to the results, TS2ACT outperforms the other baseline models by a large margin in all few-shot cases.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingreasoning

    TS2ACT significantly outperforms the supervised algorithms DCNN, TCN, and ConformerHAR under few-shot conditions.

    “TS2ACT significantly outperforms the other supervised algorithms DCNN, TCN and ConformerHAR under few-shot conditions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingreasoning

    TS2ACT outperforms the unsupervised representation learning methods SimCLR and Multi-task deep clustering.

    “TS2ACT outperforms other unsupervised representation learning methods, such as SimCLR and Multitask deep cluster”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingreasoning

    TS2ACT outperforms the semi-supervised representation learning method FixMatch.

    “TS2ACT outperforms other semi-supervised representation learning methods such as FixMatch.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    TS2ACT achieves competitive results when using the entire labeled sample set.

    “It also achieves competitive results when utilizing the entire labeled samples, which demonstrates the effectiveness of TS2ACT.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 20
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 18
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 2
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    TS2ACT achieves accuracy as high as 95% and even 100% in certain classes with only 1% labeled data.

    “the proposed TS2ACT method achieves accuracy rates as high as 95% and even 100% in certain classes (e.g., lying, walking, jogging, cycling, etc) with only 1% labeled data.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    TS2ACT has the highest accuracy and F1-score on all datasets under all few-shot conditions and also achieves competitive results when using the entire labeled sample set.

    “TS2ACT has the highest accuracy and F1-score on all dataset under all few-shot conditions and also achieves competitive results when utilizing the entire labeled samples”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    Descending stairs is easily recognized as ascending stairs, achieving the lowest accuracy of 0.63 on the PAMAP2 dataset.

    “The activity”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For ascending and descending stairs on PAMAP2, TS2ACT improves around 43% and 28% respectively over ConformerHAR.

    “for activities like”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    Sitting and standing are confused with each other on the UCI-HAR and HHAR datasets.

    “A part of”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Findingnone given

    Unsupervised and semi-supervised HAR methods lag notably behind fully supervised methods.

    “the existing unsupervised and semi-supervised HAR methods have notable performance gap to the fully-supervised methods”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The t-SNE visualization shows that some categories are not effectively separated by baseline models, making some activities indistinguishable in the latent space.

    “there are some categories that are not effectively separated by the baseline models, which leads to some activities that are indistinguishable from each other in the latent space.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    TS2ACT is almost close to convergence when using 1% labeled data, and even 0.5% labeled data for UCI-HAR.

    “our method is almost close to convergence when using 1% labeled data (even 0.5% labeled data for UCI-HAR dataset)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    Different prompt templates lead to performance variance, and the prompt 'an action of [class]' has the best performance.

    “The difference in prompt will also lead to performance variance, among which”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    MotionSense data were captured with an iPhone 6s placed in the front pocket, and each participant performed six activities in 15 trials.

    “The data was captured using an iPhone 6s, which was placed in the front pocket of each user.During the data collection, each participant performed six different activities (Walking, Jogging, Downstairs, Upstairs, Sitting, and Standing) in 15 trials, all under similar settings and conditions.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [29] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The HHAR dataset contains accelerometer and gyroscope signals from smartphones and smartwatches for six activities.

    “The Heterogeneity Human Activity Recognition (HHAR) dataset contains signals from two sensors (accelerometer and gyroscope) in smartphones and smartwatches, capturing data for six different activities: Biking, Sitting, Standing, Walking, Stair Up, and Stair Down.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [46] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    ConformerHAR achieved state-of-the-art performance on a variety of HAR datasets.

    “As a result, they achieved SOTA performance on a variety of HAR datasets.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [25] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    SimCLR learns useful features through contrastive learning with random transformations and a shared convolutional neural network.

    “The idea of SimCLR is to learn useful features through contrastive learning.The algorithm augments input data with random transformations (such as flipping, cropping, rotating, etc.) and uses a shared convolutional neural network to extract features.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [6]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The UCI-HAR dataset was collected from thirty volunteers aged 19 to 48 who wore smartphones on their waists while performing six basic activities.

    “The UCI-HAR dataset was collected from thirty volunteers aged 19 to 48, who wore smartphones (Samsung Galaxy S II) on their waists to perform six basic activities: Standing, Sitting, Lying down, Walking, Descending stairs, and Ascending stairs.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [1]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    FixMatch is a semi-supervised framework that generates pseudo-labels for unlabeled data through self-supervised learning for data augmentation.

    “FixMatch is a semi-supervised learning framework.It generates pseudo-labels for large amounts of unlabeled data via self-supervised learning methods for data augmentation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [43]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    PAMAP2 comprises data from 12 physical activities performed by 9 subjects wearing 3 inertial measurement units and a heart rate monitor.

    “The PAMAP2 Physical Activity Monitoring dataset comprises data from 12 distinct physical activities, including walking, cycling, playing soccer, and more.These activities were performed by 9 subjects wearing 3 inertial measurement units and a heart rate monitor.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [40] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The UCI-HAR dataset includes accelerometer and gyroscope data sampled at 50 Hz.

    “The dataset includes accelerometer and gyroscope data acquired at a constant sampling rate of 50 Hz.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [1]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The MotionSense dataset comprises accelerometer, gyroscope, and altitude data from 24 participants.

    “The MotionSense dataset comprises accelerometer, gyroscope, and altitude data collected from 24 participants with varying age, gender, weight, and height.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [29] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    TCN combines dilated convolutions and residual connections with causal convolutions for autoregressive prediction and outperforms LSTMs and GRUs.

    “TCN combines the best practices such as dilated convolutions and residual connections with causal convolutions for autoregressive prediction.According to the literature, it significantly outperforms common recurrent architectures such as LSTMs and GRUs.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [2]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The CLIP text encoder is an architecturally modified Transformer based on GPT-2.

    “The CLIP text encoder is also an architecturally modified Transformer [56] in GPT-2 [38]”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [56]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [38]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In HHAR, nine participants performed scripted activities for 5 minutes with an equal distribution of categories.

    “In total, nine participants performed scripted activities for 5 minutes, ensuring an equal distribution of categories.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [46] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    MDC uses a CNN-BiLSTM autoencoder, K-means clustering for pseudo-labels, and a DNN for human activity recognition.

    “Multi-task deep clustering algorithm uses an autoencoder based on CNN-BiLSTM architecture to form a latent feature representation.The K-means clustering algorithm is then applied to divide the dataset into different groups for generating pseudo-labels.Finally, a deep neural network (DNN) is further trained for human activity recognition.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [28] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first work to introduce label semantics for cross-modal dataset augmentation and to apply time series-image contrastive learning with a pre-trained image classifier to achieve few-shot human activity recognition.

    “To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work to introduce label semantic for cross-modal dataset augmentation and apply time series-image contrastive learning with a pre-trained image classifier to achieve few-shot HAR.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The labels of human activities contain rich semantic information that can be used as keywords to search for images sharing the same labels.
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    SSL predicts time-series transformations by training eight proxy tasks and uses a self-supervised model for automatic feature extraction.

    “Self-supervised learning predicts time series transformations by training eight proxy tasks and employs a self-supervised model for automatic feature extraction.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [41] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    Pre-trained models still require a sufficient number of labeled samples for fine-tuning, making it difficult to achieve good performance in few-shot conditions where labeled samples per class are limited.

    “Secondly, the pre-trained model still requires sufficient number of labeled samples for fine-tuning, making it hard to achieve good performance in the few-shot condition where labeled samples for each class are rather limited.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    DCNN uses a deep CNN for automatic feature learning from raw signals and outperforms SVM and KNN.

    “DCNN employs a deep convolutional neural network (CNN) for automatic feature learning from raw input signals.According to the literature, it outperforms many traditional methods, including support vector machines (SVM) and K-Nearest Neighbors Algorithm (KNN).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [63]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The proposed method integrates labeled text, images, and time series, uses unlabeled and cross-modal information to reduce the demand for labeled data, and thereby mitigates data scarcity in sensing-based human activity recognition.

    “The proposed method integrates labeled text, images, and time series, effectively leveraging unlabeled data and cross-modal information to reduce the demand for labeled data, thus effectively mitigating data scarcity issues in sensing-based human activity recognition.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Annotating large amounts of sensing data is impractical and unrealistic in real-world situations.
    • Rests on an assumption: Certain scenarios, such as privacy-sensitive data or dangerous activities, make accurate human activity annotation impossible.
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Noise in the input data may make deeper networks harder to generalize, and more parameters may lead to overfitting.

    “The reason may be that noise in the input data makes it harder for deeper networks to generalize, and more parameters in the model may lead to overfitting.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    In image augmentation, label text can be used to search for many semantically similar images to augment the dataset, resulting in significant performance improvement for few-shot HAR.

    “In the proposed image augmentation, the label text can be used to search for as many images (with similar semantic) as needed to augment the dataset, resulting in a significant performance improvement for HAR with few-shots.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
29 of 29
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Only a small amount of labeled samples is available, making it difficult to train a deep classification model to extract informative features from raw sensor signals.

    “Since only a small amount of labeled sample is available, it is difficult to train a deep classification model to extract informative feature from raw sensor signals.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Manual annotation of sensing data requires extensive long-term observations and significant human resources.

    “Manual annotation of the sensing data demands extensive long-term observations and significant human resources.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Certain scenarios, such as privacy-sensitive data or dangerous activities, make it impossible to annotate human activity accurately.

    “Moreover, certain scenarios, such as privacy-sensitive data or dangerous activities, make it impossible to annotate human activity accurately.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Collecting labeled sensor data from wearable devices is a costly and challenging process.

    “Consequently, the collection of labeled sensor data from wearable devices is a costly and challenging process, hampering the direct application of supervised deep learning approaches at scale.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Existing semi-supervised and unsupervised human activity recognition solutions still exhibit a noticeable performance gap compared to fully supervised solutions.

    “However, these solutions still exhibit a noticeable performance gap when compared to fully-supervised solutions”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Deep learning-based human activity recognition methods rely on a large amount of labeled data for training.

    “A major drawback of deep learning-based HAR methods is their reliance on a large amount of labeled data for training the model.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The labels of human activities contain rich semantic information that can be used as keywords to search for images sharing the same labels.

    “Since the labels of the human activities contain rich semantic information (such as”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Because of CLIP's text-image matching pre-training, the text encoder generates embeddings near the matched image embeddings.

    “Intuitively, during to the pre-training task of CLIP's text-image matching, the text encoder will generate embeddings in the neighborhood of the matched image embeddings.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Annotating large amounts of sensing data is impractical and unrealistic in real-world situations.

    “In real-world situations, annotating a large number of sensing data becomes impractical and unrealistic.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Certain scenarios, such as privacy-sensitive data or dangerous activities, make accurate human activity annotation impossible.

    “Moreover, certain scenarios, such as privacy-sensitive data or dangerous activities, make it impossible to annotate human activity accurately.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Unsupervised pre-training tasks and downstream tasks are heterogeneous, causing a mismatch that harms downstream classification accuracy.

    “Although unsupervised pre-training can effectively utilize a large amount of unlabeled time series data, the heterogeneity between unsupervised pre-training tasks and downstream tasks leads to the mismatch problem that harms the accuracy of the downstream classification tasks.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Incorrect pseudo-labels cause the model's performance to drop.

    “Meanwhile, incorrect pseudo-labels will cause the model performance to drop.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Many activities look visually similar yet are distinct, and sensor data can measure them.

    “there are many activities that may appear visually similar but are distinct and can be measured through sensor data”
13 of 13

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?

  • If no annotated data are available for unseen activities, cross-modal contrastive training (e.g., between sensor data and videos/text descriptions) is a good option.

    “However, if no annotated data are available for the unseen activities, cross-modal contrastive training (e.g., between sensor data and videos/text descriptions) is a good option [61,82,135,201].”

    From Past, Present, and Future of Sensor-based Human Activity Recognition Using Wearables: A Surveying Tutorial on a Still Challenging Task (2025) · cites this paper as [201]

    The Introduction and §3.3.4 describe contrastive training between sensor time series and images to reduce the need for labeled sensor data. But TS2ACT assumes a few labeled examples in each activity class, rather than none for unseen activities. Section 5.2 treats video-based sensing as future work and warns that the method can fail on activities unseen by its pretrained image encoder. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Twenty-shot results exceed the stated range

    Minor

    The stated 0.88-0.92 range does not cover several Table 2 results, including PAMAP2 accuracy of 0.943 and F1-score of 0.941.

  • One-shot PAMAP2 accuracy is below the claimed threshold

    Minor

    The claim says one-shot accuracy exceeds 0.7 on every dataset, but Table 2 reports 0.692 for PAMAP2.

  • Results section counts three datasets instead of four

    Minor

    The results section says Table 2 covers three datasets, while the table names UCI-HAR, HHAR, MotionSense, and PAMAP2.

3 of 3

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 12

  1. Ting Chen, Simon Kornblith, Mohammad Norouzi, and Geoffrey Hinton. 2020. A simple framework for contrastive learning of visual representations. In International conference on machine learning. PMLR, 1597--1607.
  2. Francesco Daghero, Daniele Jahier Pagliari, and Massimo Poncino. 2022. Two-stage Human Activity Recognition on Microcontrollers with Decision Trees and CNNs. In 2022 17th Conference on Ph. D Research in Microelectronics and Electronics (PRIME). IEEE, 173--176.
  3. Shohreh Deldari, Hao Xue, Aaqib Saeed, Daniel V. Smith, and Flora D. Salim. 2022. COCOA: Cross Modality Contrastive Learning for Sensor Data. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 6, 3, Article 108 (sep 2022), 28 pages.
  4. 10.1145/3090076 · DOI · Paper page
  5. 10.1145/3550294 · DOI
  6. Johannes Meyer, Adrian Frank, Thomas Schlebusch, and Enkeljeda Kasneci. 2022. A CNN-Based Human Activity Recognition System Combining a Laser Feedback Interferometry Eye Movement Sensor and an IMU for Context-Aware Smart Glasses. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 5, 4, Article 172 (dec 2022), 24 pages.
  7. Xin Qin, Yiqiang Chen, Jindong Wang, and Chaohui Yu. 2020. Cross-Dataset Activity Recognition via Adaptive Spatial-Temporal Transfer Learning. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 3, 4, Article 148 (sep 2020), 25 pages.
  8. Alec Radford, Jong Wook Kim, Chris Hallacy, Aditya Ramesh, Gabriel Goh, Sandhini Agarwal, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Pamela Mishkin, Jack Clark, et al. 2021. Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision. In International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 8748--8763.
  9. Kihyuk Sohn, David Berthelot, Nicholas Carlini, Zizhao Zhang, Han Zhang, Colin A Raffel, Ekin Dogus Cubuk, Alexey Kurakin, and Chun-Liang Li. 2020. Fixmatch: Simplifying semi-supervised learning with consistency and confidence. Advances in neural information processing systems 33 (2020), 596--608.
  10. Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017. Attention is all you need. Advances in neural information processing systems 30 (2017).
  11. Jianbo Yang, Minh Nhut Nguyen, Phyo Phyo San, Xiaoli Li, and Shonali Krishnaswamy. 2015. Deep convolutional neural networks on multichannel time series for human activity recognition.. In International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 15. Buenos Aires, Argentina, 3995--4001.
  12. Han Zhou, Yi Gao, Xinyi Song, Wenxin Liu, and Wei Dong. 2020. LimbMotion: Decimeter-Level Limb Tracking for Wearable-Based Human-Computer Interaction. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 3, 4, Article 161 (sep 2020), 24 pages.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Xia, K., Li, W., Gan, S., & Lu, S.
Affiliations
Nanjing University (CN)
Venue
Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies
Published
2023-12-19
Volume
7
Issue
4
Pages
1-22
ISSN
2474-9567 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4390798810
Cited by
19
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 4
FWCI
1.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive Mobile Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies (publishedVersion, public-domain)
Funders
National Natural Science Foundation of China (61972196)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Context-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Time Series Analysis and Forecasting
Keywords
human activity recognition, few-shot learning, time series, CLIP, contrastive learning, prompt learning, wearable sensors, unsupervised learning

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-05.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-05.

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