Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 21, 2026
Author Spotlight: Addressing Technical and Subjective Challenges in Measuring Classroom Attention
Published on: December 15, 2023
Machine learning for activity recognition: hip versus wrist data
Stewart G Trost1, Yonglei Zheng, Weng-Keen Wong
1Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove QLD 4059, Australia.
Problem Addressed:
Wrist-worn accelerometers are associated with greater compliance. However, validated algorithms for predicting activity type from wrist-worn accelerometer data are lacking. This study compared the activity recognition rates of an activity classifier trained on acceleration signal collected on the wrist and hip.
Methodology:
52 children and adolescents (mean age 13.7 ± 3.1 year) completed 12 activity trials that were categorized into 7 activity classes: lying down, sitting, standing, walking, running, basketball, and dancing. During each trial, participants wore an ActiGraph GT3X+ tri-axial accelerometer on the right hip and the non-dominant wrist. Features were extracted from 10-s windows and inputted into a regularized logistic regression model using R (Glmnet + L1).
Results:
Classification accuracy for the hip and wrist was 91.0% ± 3.1% and 88.4% ± 3.0%, respectively. The hip model exhibited excellent classification accuracy for sitting (91.3%), standing (95.8%), walking (95.8%), and running (96.8%); acceptable classification accuracy for lying down (88.3%) and basketball (81.9%); and modest accuracy for dance (64.1%). The wrist model exhibited excellent classification accuracy for sitting (93.0%), standing (91.7%), and walking (95.8%); acceptable classification accuracy for basketball (86.0%); and modest accuracy for running (78.8%), lying down (74.6%) and dance (69.4%).Potential Impact: Both the hip and wrist algorithms achieved acceptable classification accuracy, allowing researchers to use either placement for activity recognition.
