Yuliang Chen, Weiwei Shi, Rong Zablocki, Animesh Kumar, Jordan A. Carlson, Sheri J. Hartman, Mikael Anne Greenwood-Hickman, Paul R. Hibbing 等 13 位作者
Accurate detection of sedentary behavior is important for studying health risks related to prolonged sitting, but posture-based classification remains challenging with wearable sensors, especially at the wrist. We study whether a deep learning model trained on hip-worn accelerometer data can transfer to wrist-worn accelerometer data for sitting versus non-sitting classification. We use CHAP, a CNN-BiLSTM model originally developed for hip accelerometers, and evaluate its zero-shot performance on wrist data as well as its adaptation through finetuning with varying amounts of labeled wrist data. Experiments are conducted on the iWatch dataset with ground-truth posture labels derived from wearable cameras. The hip-trained model performs strongly on hip data without retraining, but accuracy drops on wrist data due to sensor placement shift. Finetuning CHAP provides consistent advantages over transformer models trained from scratch. These findings suggest that hip-based pretraining provides a useful starting point for wrist deployment, while highlighting the need for wrist-specific adaptation to handle higher signal variability.
Retrieval-augmented Web applications increasingly employ multi-agent debate (MAD) to aggregate conflicting, noisy, and heterogeneous information, yet deliberation is fundamentally a social process susceptible to interpersonal dynamics. When retrieved Web sources contain latent hazards alongside safe factual content, social biases such as conformity pressure and authority deference can override evidence-grounded safety boundaries. In this work, we investigate whether the social structure of deliberation can paradoxically amplify latent Web safety risks. We introduce SafeConflict-Bias, a controlled counterfactual diagnostic protocol spanning six core Web risk categories, which holds queries and retrieved evidence strictly invariant while isolating conversational majority sway, authority cues, and confidence asymmetry. Empirical evaluation across diverse proprietary and open-source backbones reveals that while isolated models reliably reject unsafe guidance, standard MAD catastrophically capitulates to social pressure---surging unsafe adoption from 0.0\% up to 100.0\% and systematically silencing safe minority evidence. To resolve this systemic fragility without retraining or debate regeneration, we propose RiskTrace-Debias, an inference-time auditing framework uniting evidence-first precommitment, social-metadata masking, and consistency-gated arbitration. RiskTrace-Debias suppresses worst-case unsafe adoption to $\le 2.0\%$ across all architectures without inducing over-refusal, while generating verifiable provenance traces to audit interpersonal manipulation in Web deliberation.