AUTHOR=Hoelzemann Alexander , Van Laerhoven Kristof TITLE=A matter of annotation: an empirical study on in situ and self-recall activity annotations from wearable sensors JOURNAL=Frontiers in Computer Science VOLUME=6 YEAR=2024 URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/computer-science/articles/10.3389/fcomp.2024.1379788 DOI=10.3389/fcomp.2024.1379788 ISSN=2624-9898 ABSTRACT=

Research into the detection of human activities from wearable sensors is a highly active field, benefiting numerous applications, from ambulatory monitoring of healthcare patients via fitness coaching to streamlining manual work processes. We present an empirical study that evaluates and contrasts four commonly employed annotation methods in user studies focused on in-the-wild data collection. For both the user-driven, in situ annotations, where participants annotate their activities during the actual recording process, and the recall methods, where participants retrospectively annotate their data at the end of each day, the participants had the flexibility to select their own set of activity classes and corresponding labels. Our study illustrates that different labeling methodologies directly impact the annotations' quality, as well as the capabilities of a deep learning classifier trained with the data. We noticed that in situ methods produce less but more precise labels than recall methods. Furthermore, we combined an activity diary with a visualization tool that enables the participant to inspect and label their activity data. Due to the introduction of such a tool were able to decrease missing annotations and increase the annotation consistency, and therefore the F1-Score of the deep learning model by up to 8% (ranging between 82.1 and 90.4% F1-Score). Furthermore, we discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the methods compared in our study, the biases they could introduce, and the consequences of their usage on human activity recognition studies as well as possible solutions.