SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2507.00484

Clustering-based accelerometer measures to model relationships between physical activity and key outcomes

Abstract

Accelerometers produce enormous amounts of data. Research that incorporates such data often involves a derived summary metric to describe physical activity. Traditional metrics have often ignored the temporal nature of the data. We build on previous work that applies unsupervised machine learning techniques to describe physical activity patterns over time. Specifically, we evaluate a summary measure of accelerometer data derived from unsupervised clustering in a regression framework through comparisons with other traditional measures: duration of time spent in different activity intensity states, Time Active Mean (TAM), Time Active Variability (TAV), Activity Intensity Mean (AIM), and Activity Intensity Variability (AIV) using data from 268 children participating in the Stanford GOALS trial. The proportion of variation explained by the new measure was comparable to that of traditional measures across regressions of three pre-specified clinical outcomes (waist circumference, fasting insulin levels, and fasting triglyceride levels). For example, cluster membership explained 25%, 11%, and 6% of the variation in waist circumference, fasting insulin levels, and fasting triglyceride levels whereas TAM explained 25%, 10%, and 6% for these same outcomes. Importantly, however, there are challenges when regressing an outcome on a variable derived from unsupervised machine learning techniques, particularly regarding replicability. This includes the processing involved in deriving the variable as well as the machine learning approach itself. While these remain open topics to resolve, our findings demonstrate the promise of a new summary measure that enables addressing questions involving a temporal component that other traditional summary metrics do not reflect.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Hyatt Moore IV, Thomas N. Robinson, Alexandria Jensen, Fatma Gunturkun, K. Farish Haydel, Kristopher I Kapphahn, Manisha Desai. 2025-07-01. Clustering-based accelerometer measures to model relationships between physical activity and key outcomes. https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.00484

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME