Use of smartphone sensors to quantify the productive cycle elements of hand fallers on industrial cable logging operations

References

• Adebayo A B, Han HS, Johnson L. 2007. Productivity and cost of cut-to-length and whole-tree harvesting in a mixed-conifer stand. Forest Prod J. 57(6):59–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anjum A, Ilyas MU. 2013. Activity recognition using smartphone sensors. Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE 10th Consumer Communications and Networking Conference; Jan 11–14; Las Vegas, NV. IEEE. p. 914–919.
   Google Scholar
• Attal F, Mohammed S, Dedabrishvili M, Chamroukhi F, Oukhellou L, Amirat Y. 2015. Physical human activity recognition using wearable sensors. Sensors (Basel). 15(12):31314–31338.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnes R M. 1958. Motion and time study. 2nd ed. New York (NY): Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Bayat A, Pomplun M, Tran DA. 2014. A study on human activity recognition using accelerometer data from smartphones. Procedia Comput Sci. 34:450–457.
   Google Scholar
• Becker R M, Keefe RF, Anderson NM. 2017. Use of real-time GNSS-RF data to characterize the swing movements of forestry equipment. Forests. 8(2):44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Becker R M, Keefe RF, Anderson NM, Eitel JUH. 2018. Use of lidar-derived landscape parameters to characterize alternative harvest system options in the Inland Northwest. Int J Forest Eng. 29(3):179–191.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Belgiu M, Drăguţ L. 2016. Random forest in remote sensing: a review of applications and future directions. ISPRS J Photogramm Remote Sens. 114:24–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bell C K, Keefe RF, Fried JS. 2017. Validation of the OpCost logging cost model using contractor surveys. Int J Forest Eng. 28(2):73–84.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bjorheden R, Thompson MA. 2000. An international nomenclature for forest work study. In: Field DB, editor. Proceedings of IUFRO 1995 S3.04 Subject Area: 20th World Congress; Aug 6–12; Tampere, Finland. Orono (ME): University of Maine. p. 190–215.
   Google Scholar
• Bolding M C, Lanford BL. 2005. Wildfire fuel harvesting and resultant biomass utilization using a cut-to-length/small chipper system. Forest Prod J. 55(12):181–188.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borz S A, Talagai N, Cheta M, Montoya AVG, Vizuete DDC. 2018. Automating data collection in motor-manual time and motion studies implemented in short rotation coppice. Bioresources. 13(2):3236–3249.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breiman L. 2001. Random forests. Mach Learn. 45(1):5–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breiman L. 2002. Manual on setting up, using, and understanding random forests v3.1. Statistics Department University of California Berkeley, CA, USA. https://www.stat.berkeley.edu/~breiman/Using_random_forests_V3.1.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Brinker R W, Kinard J, Rummer R, Lanford B. 2002. Machine rates for selected forest harvesting machines. Auburn (AL): Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station. Circular 296 (revised). p. 32..
   Google Scholar
• Chen L, Hoey J, Nugent CD, Cook DJ, Yu Z. 2012. Sensor-based activity recognition. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern C Appl Rev. 42(6):790–808.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Contreras M, Freitas R, Ribeiro L, Stringer J, Clark C. 2017. Multi-camera surveillance systems for time and motion studies of timber harvesting equipment. Comput Electron Agric. 135(1):208–215.
   Google Scholar
• del Rosario M B, Redmond SJ, Lovell NH. 2015. Tracking the evolution of smartphone sensing for monitoring human movement. Sensors (Basel). 15(8):18901–18933.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Fulvio F, Abbas D, Spinelli R, Acuna M, Ackerman P, Lindroos O. 2017. Benchmarking technical and cost factors in forest felling and processing operations in different global regions during the period 2013–2014. Int J Forest Eng. 28(2):94–105.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ermes M, Pӓrkkӓ J, Mӓntyjӓrvi J, Korhonen I. 2008. Detection of daily activities and sports with wearable sensors in controlled and uncontrolled conditions. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed. 12(1):20–26.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gallo R, Grigolato S, Cavalli R, Mazzetto F. 2013. GNSS-based operational monitoring devices for forest logging operation chains. J Agric Eng. 44(2s):140–144.
   Google Scholar
• Genuer R, Poggi JM, Tuleau-Malot C. 2010. Variable selection using random forests. Pattern Recognit Lett. 31(14):2225–2236.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gjoreski M, Gjoreski H, Luštrek M, Gams M. 2016. How accurately can your wrist device recognize daily activities and detect falls? Sensors (Basel). 16(6):800.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grayson L M, Keefe RF, Tinkham WT, Eitel JUH, Saralecos JD, Smith AMS, Zimbelman EG. 2016. Accuracy of WAAS-enabled GPS-RF warning signals when crossing a terrestrial geofence. Sensors (Basel). 16(6):912.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gu T, Wu Z, Tao X, Pung HK, Lu J. 2009. epSICAR: an emerging patterns based approach to sequential, interleaved and concurrent activity recognition. Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications; Mar 9–13; Galveston, TX. IEEE.
   Google Scholar
• Hartsough B R, Zhang X, Fight RD. 2001. Harvesting cost model for small trees in natural stands in the interior northwest. Forest Prod J. 51(4):54–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hiesl P, Benjamin JG. 2013. Applicability of international harvesting equipment productivity studies in maine, usa: a literature review. Forests. 4(4):898–921.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huyler N K, LeDoux CB. 1997. Cycle-time equation for the Koller K300 cable yarder operating on steep slopes in the Northeast. Radnor (PA): United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. Research Paper NE-705.
   Google Scholar
• Japkowicz N, Stephen S. 2002. The class imbalance problem: a systematic study. Intell Data Anal. 6(5):429–449.
   Google Scholar
• Keefe R F, Eitel JUH, Smith AMS, Tinkham WT. 2014. Applications of multi transmitter GPS-VHF in forest operations. Proceedings of the 47th International Symposium on Forestry Mechanization and 5th International Forest Engineering Conference; Sep 23–26; Gerardmer, France.
   Google Scholar
• Khalilia M, Chakraborty S, Popescu M. 2011. Predicting disease risks from highly imbalanced data using random forest. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 11:51.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khan A M, Siddiqi MH, Lee SW. 2013. Exploratory data analysis of acceleration signals to select light-weight and accurate features for real-time activity recognition on smartphones. Sensors (Basel). 13(10):13099–13122.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lau S L, König I, David K, Parandian B, Carius-Düssel C, Schultz M. 2010. Supporting patient monitoring using activity recognition with a smartphone. Proceedings of the 2010 7th International Symposium on Wireless Communication Systems; Sep 19–22; York, United Kingdom. IEEE. p. 810–814.
   Google Scholar
• Lawrence R L, Wood SD, Sheley RL. 2006. Mapping invasive plants using hyperspectral imagery and Breiman Cutler classifications (RandomForest). Remote Sens Environ. 100(3):356–362.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liaw A, Wiener M. 2002. Classification and regression by randomForest. R News. 2(3):18–22.
   Google Scholar
• Lortz D, Kluender R, McCoy W. 1997. Manual felling time and productivity in southern pine forests. Forest Prod J. 47:59–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Magagnotti N, Kanzian C, Schulmeyer F, Spinelli R. 2013. A new guide for work studies in forestry. Int J Forest Eng. 24(3):249–253.
   Google Scholar
• Matthews D M. 1942. Cost control in the logging industry. New York and London: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc.
   Google Scholar
• McDonald T, Fulton JP. 2005. Automated time study of skidders using global positioning system data. Comput Electron Agric. 48(1):19–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonald T, Fulton JP, Darr MJ, Gallagher TV. 2008. Evaluation of a system to spatially monitor hand planting of pine seedlings. Comput Electron Agric. 64(2):173–182.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehrang S, Pietilä J, Korhonen I. 2018. An activity recognition framework deploying the random forest classifier and a single optical heart rate monitoring and triaxial accelerometer wrist-band. Sensors (Basel). 18(2):613.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell D, Gallagher T. 2007. Chipping whole trees for fuel chips: a production study. South J Appl For. 31(4):176–180.
   Google Scholar
• Miyata E S. 1980. Determining fixed and operating costs of logging equipment. St Paul (MN): USDA Forest Service North Central Experiment Station. General Technical Report NC-55.
   Google Scholar
• Newman S M, Keefe RF, Brooks RH, Ahonen EQ, Wempe AM. 2018. Human factors affecting logging injury incidents in Idaho and the potential for real-time location-sharing technology to improve safety. Safety (Basel). 4(4):43.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Olivera A, Visser R, Acuna M, Morgenroth J. 2016. Automatic GNSS-enabled harvester data collection as a tool to evaluate factors affecting harvester productivity in a Eucalyptus spp. harvesting operation in Uruguay. Int J Forest Eng. 27(1):15–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olsen E D, Kellogg LD. 1983. Comparison of time-study techniques for evaluating logging production. Trans ASAE. 26(6):1665–1668.
   Google Scholar
• Oshiro T M, Perez PS, Baranauskas JA. 2012. How many trees in a random forest? In: Perner P, editor. MLDM 2012: Machine Learning and Data Mining in Pattern Recognition. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 7376. Berlin (Heidelberg): Springer; p. 154–168.
   Google Scholar
• Qian C, Liu H, Tank J, Chen Y, Kaartinen H, Kukko A, Zhu L, Liang X, Chen L, Hyppa J. 2017. An integrated GNSS/INS/LiDAR-SLAM positioning method for highly accurate forest stem mapping. Remote Sens (Basel). 9(1):3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R Core Team. 2018. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna (Austria): R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Reddy S, Mun M, Burke J, Estrin D, Hansen M, Srivastava M. 2010. Using mobile phones to determine transportation modes. ACM Trans Sens Netw. 6(2):13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shoaib M, Bosch S, Incel OD, Scholten H, Havinga PJM. 2014. Fusion of smartphone motion sensors for physical activity recognition. Sensors (Basel). 14(6):10146–10176.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shoaib M, Bosch S, Incel OD, Scholten H, Havinga PJM. 2015. A survey of online activity recognition using mobile phones. Sensors (Basel). 15(1):2059–2085.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shoaib M, Bosch S, Incel OD, Scholten H, Havinga PJM. 2016. Complex human activity recognition using smartphone and wrist-worn motion sensors. Sensors (Basel). 16(4):426.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siirtola P, Rӧning J. 2013. Ready-to-use activity recognition for smartphones. Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Data Mining (CIDM); Apr 16–19; Singapore. IEEE. p. 59–64.
   Google Scholar
• Spinelli R, Hartsough B. 2001. A survey of Italian chipping operations. Biomass Bioenergy. 21(6):434–444.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spinelli R, Nati C, Magagnotti N. 2009. Using modified foragers to harvest short-rotation poplar plantations. Biomass Bioenergy. 33(5):817–821.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spinelli R, Visser R. 2008. Analyzing and estimating delays in harvester operations. Int J Forest Eng. 19(1):36–41.
   Google Scholar
• Strandgard M, Mitchell R. 2015. Automated time study of forwarders using GPS and a vibration sensor. Croat J Forest Eng. 36(2):175–184.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strandgard M, Walsh D, Acuna M. 2013. Estimating harvester productivity in Pinus radiata plantations using StanForD stem files. Scan J For Res. 28(1):73–80.
   Google Scholar
• Strobl C, Boulesteix AL, Kneib T, Augustin T, Zeileis A. 2008. Conditional variable importance for random forests. BMC Bioinf. 9:307.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strobl C, Boulesteix AL, Zeileis A, Hothorn T. 2007. Bias in random forest variable importance measures: illustrations, sources and a solution. BMC Bioinf. 8:25.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svetnik V, Liaw A, Tong C, Culberson JC, Sheridan RP, Feuston BP. 2003. Random Forest: a classification and regression tool for compound classification and QSAR modeling. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 43(6):1947–1958.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Swan M. 2013. The quantified self: fundamental disruption in big data science and biological discovery. Big Data. 1(2):85–99.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swanepoel D W, Myburgh HC, Howe DM, Mahomed F, Eikelboom RH. 2014. Smartphone hearing screening with integrated quality control and data management. Int J Audiol. 53(12):841–849.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tiernan D, Zeleke G, Owende PMO, Kanali CL, Lyons J, Ward SM. 2004. Effect of working conditions on forwarder productivity in cut-to-length timber harvesting on sensitive forest sites in Ireland. Biosyst Eng. 87(2):167–177.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trost S G, Zheng Y, Wong WK. 2014. Machine learning for activity recognition: hip versus wrist data. Physiol Meas. 35(11):2183–2189.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Veal M W, Taylor SE, McDonald TP, McLemore DK, Dunn MR. 2001. Accuracy of tracking forest machines with GPS. Trans ASAE. 44(6):1903–1911.
   Google Scholar
• Wang J, Haarlaa R. 2002. Production analysis of an excavator-based harvester: a case study in Finnish forest operations. Forest Prod J. 52(3):85.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang J, Long C, McNeel J, Baumgras J. 2004. Productivity and cost of manual felling and cable skidding in central Appalachian hardwood forests. Forest Prod J. 54(12):45–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang J, McNeel J, Baumgrass J. 2003. A computer-based time study system for timber harvesting operations. Forest Prod J. 53(3):47–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weiss G M, Timko JL, Gallagher CM, Yoneda K, Schreiber AJ. 2016. Smartwatch-based activity recognition: a machine learning approach. Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE-EMBS International Conference on Biomedical and Health Informatics (BHI); Feb 24–27; Las Vegas, NV. IEEE. p. 426–429.
   Google Scholar
• Wempe A M, Keefe RF. 2017. Characterizing rigging crew proximity to hazards on cable logging operations using GNSS-RF: effect of GNSS positioning error on worker safety status. Forests. 8(10):357.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wempe A M, Keefe RF, Newman SM, Paveglio TB. 2019. Intent to adopt location sharing for logging safety applications. Safety (Basel). 5(1):7.
   Google Scholar
• Wu W, Dasgupta S, Ramirez EE, Peterson C, Norman GJ. 2012. Classification accuracies of physical activities using smartphone motion sensors. J Med Internet Res. 14(5):e130.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhong L, Gong P, Biging G. 2014. Efficient corn and soybean mapping with temporal extendability: a multi-year experiment using Landsat imagery. Remote Sens Environ. 140:1–13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zimbelman E G, Keefe RF. 2018. Real-time positioning in logging: effects of forest stand characteristics, topography, and line-of-sight obstructions on GNSS-RF transponder accuracy and radio signal propagation. PLoS One. 13(1):e0191017.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zimbelman E G, Keefe RF, Strand EK, Kolden CA, Wempe AM. 2017. Hazards in motion: development of mobile geofences for use in logging safety. Sensors (Basel). 17(4):822.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar