Table 2.
Proposed architecture accuracy and efficiency: near falls vs. steady walking.
| Subject | Se (%) | SpWS 1(%) | DT (ms) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| µ±σ | Max|Min | |||
| 1 | 90.00 (9/10) |
99.22 (386/389) |
369.83 ± 97.49 | 536.11 | 202.02 |
| 2 | 100.00 (10/10) |
98.32 (292/297) |
436.72 ± 86.66 | 634.21 | 371.15 |
| 3 | 90.00 (9/10) |
98.71 (308/312) |
299.76 ± 107.99 | 432.00 | 194.60 |
| 4 | 90.00 (9/10) |
98.55 (339/344) |
355.85 ± 151.38 | 581.35 | 198.73 |
| 5 | 90.00 (9/10) |
99.46 (370/372) |
446.72 ± 112.89 | 626.45 | 374.36 |
| 6 | 100.00 (10/10) |
99.20 (374/377) |
314.82 ± 105.34 | 501.23 | 160.42 |
| Avg 2 | 93.33 ± 5.16 | 98.91 ± 0.44 | 370.62 ± 60.85 | 634.21 |160.42 3 |
1SpWS: specificity strictly related to walking steps as not loss of balance actions; 2Avg: averages among all the analyzed subjects (Sub. 1-6); 3 Values refer to the highest maximum and lowest minimum values among the reported data.