跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2606.13194 · v2

HARENA: A Living Benchmark for Sensor-Based Human Activity Recognition on Resource-Constrained Edge Devices

首次提交 2026-06-11 19:01
版本更新 2026-11-09 16:49
雷达观测 2026-11-10 15:22
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Sensor-based human activity recognition runs on edge devices, trading performance against latency, memory, and energy. Yet new architectures are usually compared with few, often outdated baselines on few datasets with study-specific data preparation and hardware, leaving open which perform best at what cost. We present HARENA, a living benchmark with a public leaderboard, to which new architectures and datasets can be added under one protocol. Its initial suite evaluates 16 neural architectures and three classical baselines on 29 datasets, measuring performance on unseen subjects and deployment cost on a smartphone, smartwatch, and microcontroller. CNN-HAR, the suite's oldest deep architecture, leads overall, but 8 architectures lie within 2.5 points of its mean test macro-F1, while their cost differs by orders of magnitude. On the microcontroller, Random Forest leads on latency and peak RAM, LITEWAY-Light on flash, and TinyHAR is most accurate within the real-time budget. Rankings shift with dataset and channel count, so general claims require many datasets, which a growing benchmark can provide. We find no sign of benchmark overfitting, but performance drops by a median of 15.0 points on unseen subjects, about three times the typical spread between architectures, making generalization and adaptation the most promising future directions.

作者备注:68 pages, 20 Figures, 31 Tables

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v2 · 2026-11-09 16:49 · 最新观测版本

HARENA: A Living Benchmark for Sensor-Based Human Activity Recognition on Resource-Constrained Edge Devices

Sensor-based human activity recognition runs on edge devices, trading performance against latency, memory, and energy. Yet new architectures are usually compared with few, often outdated baselines on few datasets with study-specific data preparation and hardware, leaving open which perform best at what cost. We present HARENA, a living benchmark with a public leaderboard, to which new architectures and datasets can be added under one protocol. Its initial suite evaluates 16 neural architectures and three classical baselines on 29 datasets, measuring performance on unseen subjects and deployment cost on a smartphone, smartwatch, and microcontroller. CNN-HAR, the suite's oldest deep architecture, leads overall, but 8 architectures lie within 2.5 points of its mean test macro-F1, while their cost differs by orders of magnitude. On the microcontroller, Random Forest leads on latency and peak RAM, LITEWAY-Light on flash, and TinyHAR is most accurate within the real-time budget. Rankings shift with dataset and channel count, so general claims require many datasets, which a growing benchmark can provide. We find no sign of benchmark overfitting, but performance drops by a median of 15.0 points on unseen subjects, about three times the typical spread between architectures, making generalization and adaptation the most promising future directions.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗