Acerca de este artículo
Publicado en línea: 22 nov 2021
Páginas: 917 - 926
Recibido: 17 jun 2021
Aceptado: 24 sept 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/amns.2021.2.00086
Palabras clave
© 2021 Yunlong Ma et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Fig. 5

Fig. 6

Fig. 7

Comparison of algorithm results based on WARD
Traditional algorithm 1 | 200 | Time-frequency domain characteristics | DT | <1 | 92.6 |
Traditional algorithm 2 | 45 | LPP | DSC | N/A | 85.1 |
Traditional algorithm 3 | 40 | RP | SRC | N/A | 81.6 |
Algorithm | 45 | Periodic extraction of calibration starting point | SVM | <1 | 98.9 |
Behaviour description in WARD
1 | Walk normally | Walk forward for >10 s |
2 | Walk counterclockwise | Go counterclockwise for >10 s |
3 | Walk clockwise | Clockwise for >10 s |
4 | To the left | Turn left on the spot for >10 s |
5 | Turn right | Turn right on the spot for >10 s |
6 | Go up the stairs | Go up >10 stairs |
7 | Down the stairs | Go down >10 stairs |
8 | Jogging | Jogging lasts >10 s |
9 | Jump | Jump in place >5 times |
10 | Push wheelchair | Push the wheelchair for >10 s |
Comparison of classification results of different classifiers
SVMs | 98.9 |
DT | 89.5 |
Naive Bayes | 86.9 |
K-neighbours | 93.9 |
Confusion matrix of 10 dynamic behaviour categories
1 | 97 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 97 |
2 | 0 | 98 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 98 |
3 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 98 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 98 |
6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 98 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 98 |
7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 94 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 94 |
8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 99 | 0 | 0 | 99 |
9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 100 |
10 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 100 | 100 |
Total recognition rate | 98.4 |