Skip to main content
. 2015 Oct 5;15(10):25474–25506. doi: 10.3390/s151025474

Table 16.

Comparison with other accelerometer-based phone placement solutions. LOSO, leave-one-subject-out.

Park et al. [19] Wiese et al. [8] Fujinami et al. [20] Alanezi et al. [22] Wahl et al. [25] Kunze et al. [9] Mannini et al. [18] This Work
Positions 4: Bag, ear, hand, pocket 4: Pocket, bag, hand, out 9: Neck, chest, jacket pocket, trousers pockets (front, back), backpack, handbag, messenger bag, shoulder bag 6: hand-holding, talking on phone, watching a video, pockets (pants, hip, jacket) 5: Pants, table, jacket, bag, no label 5: Head, wrist, torso pockets (front, back); AND 5: hand, wrist upper arm, knee and back 5: Ankle, thigh, hip, upper arm, wrist 8: Backpack, hand, pocket, messenger-bag, jacket-pocket, arm, belt, wrist
Activities Walking sitting (on a couch, on a desk chair), standing, walking Walking Idle, walking, running Working, eating, walking/cycling, Vehicle activities of daily living, household, workshop and office activities Lying (on back, on left side, on right side), sitting (Internet searching, typing, writing, reading), standing still, sorting files on paperwork, exercise bike, cycling (outdoor level, outdoor uphill, outdoor downhill), elevator (up, down), jumping jacks, sweeping with broom, painting with roller, painting with brush, walking, stairs Sit, stand, bike, walk, run, jog, stairs (up/down), transport (bus), secondary activities: sending an SMS, making a call, interaction with an app
No. of Subjects 14 15–32 20 10 6 17 33 35
Features Frequency domain Time and frequency domain Time and frequency domain Time domain Time domain Time domain Time and frequency domain Time and frequency domain
Classifier C4.5, SVM SVM, random forest J48, SVM, naive Bayes, MLP J48, naive Bayes, logistic regression, MLP Nearest centroid classifier HMM + particle filter smoothing SVM J48, KNN, random forest, MLP
Validation method 10-fold cross LOSO LOSO 10-fold cross 10-fold cross Train/test over randomly-picked subset LOSO LOSO
Recognition accuracy 99.6% 79% (random forest) 74.6% 88.5% (only accelerometer, first activity detected, J48) 82% (only accelerometer) 82.0% 92.7% (first walking activity detected) 85% (datasets combined)
Recognition accuracy, walking 99.6% Not reported 74.6% Not reported Not reported 94.9% 81% 88% (datasets combined)