Loading
Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · October 22, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Wearable inertial measurement unit (IMU) systems for construction worker human activity recognition (HAR) routinely report aggregate accuracies above 95 %, rarely under genuine subject-independent (leave-one-subject-out (LOSO)) evaluation, masking the per-individual variance that determines real-world deployment performance. Using the VTT-ConIoT benchmark, we conduct, to our knowledge, the first systematic configuration sensitivity analysis of this dataset: six classifiers across five sensor placements and three window sizes under a single LOSO protocol, a personalised-calibration pilot, and a validated comparison of tabular GAN-based and standard time-series augmentation. Per-subject LOSO accuracy for the main multi-sensor, 16-class configuration ranges from 61.9 % to 88.7 % (mean 77.5 %), a 27 pp spread, though all data are laboratory-collected. Multi-sensor fusion and longer windows both improve accuracy; standard augmentation gives small, consistent gains, while Conditional Tabular GAN (CTGAN) augmentation actively harms accuracy with a demonstrated distributional-fidelity mechanism; and personalised calibration recovers 16.8 pp for the weakest participants from just 30 % of their own data. These findings provide evidence-grounded configuration guidance for scaling occupational body sensor networks towards field deployment