| Literature DB >> 35198533 |
Abstract
Tabata training plays an important role in health promotion. Effective monitoring of exercise energy expenditure is an important basis for exercisers to adjust their physical activities to achieve exercise goals. The input of acceleration combined with heart rate data and the application of machine learning algorithm are expected to improve the accuracy of EE prediction. This study is based on acceleration and heart rate to build linear regression and back propagate neural network prediction model of Tabata energy expenditure, and compare the accuracy of the two models. Participants (n = 45; Mean age: 21.04 ± 2.39 years) were randomly assigned to the modeling and validation data set in a 3:1 ratio. Each participant simultaneously wore four accelerometers (dominant hand, non-dominant hand, right hip, right ankle), a heart rate band and a metabolic measurement system to complete Tabata exercise test. After obtaining the test data, the correlation of the variables is calculated and passed to linear regression and back propagate neural network algorithms to predict energy expenditure during exercise and interval period. The validation group was entered into the model to obtain the predicted value and the prediction effect was tested. Bland-Alterman test showed two models fell within the consistency interval. The mean absolute percentage error of back propagate neural network was 12.6%, and linear regression was 14.7%. Using both acceleration and heart rate for estimation of Tabata energy expenditure is effective, and the prediction effect of back propagate neural network algorithm is better than linear regression, which is more suitable for Tabata energy expenditure monitoring.Entities:
Keywords: Tabata training; acceleration; energy expenditure; heart rate; machine learning
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35198533 PMCID: PMC8858940 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.804471
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Public Health ISSN: 2296-2565
Summary of an existing model in EE prediction.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Shaopeng et al. ( | Daily physical activity, Walk, run | One-variable linear regression | Acceleration |
| Kuo et al. ( | Uphill run; walk | Mutiple linear regression | Acceleration, heart rate; morphological indicators acceleration |
| Montoye et al. ( | Daily physical activity, walk, run, resistance exercise | BP neural network | Acceleration |
| O'Driscoll et al. ( | Stand, walk, run, slope run | Random forest | Acceleration, heart rate, morphological indicators, subject characteristics |
| Kang et al. ( | Run, cycling, resistance exercise | BP neural network | Acceleration, heart rate, body temperature |
Figure 1Position of instrument wearing (A) Front view and (B) Lateral view.
Figure 2Tabata exercise process.
Figure 3Exercise intensity test.
Figure 4(A) Correlation analysis of exercise period; (B) Correlation analysis of interval period.
Figure 5Variables and EE scatter diagram. (A) the unit of 10s corresponds to VM during the exercise and EEExe; (B) the unit of 10s corresponds to HR during the exercise and EEExe; (C) VM value during 30s exercise and EEInt; (D) HR value during 0–10s exercise and EEInt.
EE prediction model of Tabata linear regression.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Exercise | EEExe = 0.000044*VMRAExe + 0.193*HRExe + 0.23*BW-3.05 | 0.71 |
| Interval | EEInt = 0.000011*VMRA(30s) + 0.0116*HRExe(0−10s) + 0.030*BW-1.99 | 0.73 |
Figure 6The prediction error of model of each hidden node. (A) Exercise period; (B) Interval period.
Figure 7Model structure. (A) BP neural network during exercise; (B) BP neural network during exercise.
Figure 8Predicted values and Measured values.
Figure 9Bland Altman plot for models. (A) Linear regression during Exercise. (B) Linear regression during interval. (C) BP neural network during Exercise (D) BP neural network during interval.
Figure 10Prediction error of EE during exercise and interval period.
Figure 11MAPE comparison of the EE of total exercise.