# Deep Learning-Based Optimal Smart Shoes Sensor Selection for Energy Expenditure and Heart Rate Estimation

^{1}

^{2}

^{3}

^{4}

^{*}

^{†}

## Abstract

**:**

## 1. Introduction

## 2. Materials and Methods

#### 2.1. System Overview

#### 2.2. Experiments

#### 2.3. Data Preparation

## 3. Proposed Model

- The manual feature extraction process is not necessary since a fully automated end-to-end deep learning model was applied;
- The spatiotemporal characteristics of the multivariate time-series data that is complex to process could be effectively extracted using DenseNet and bidirectional GRU (Bi-GRU);
- The importance of each channel in estimating HR and EE could be quantified using the channel-wise attention method, and it can explain the optimal sensors for the task.

**Figure 7.**Structure of the proposed model. The shoe data from 20 channel sensors are fed into the input of the model and the channel-wise attention layer increases the intensity of the significant channels. The spatial features from the multi-channel data are extracted using DenseNet, and the temporal features are produced through Bi-GRU. Finally, HR and EE are estimated after the global average pooling (GAP) layer.

#### 3.1. Channel-Wise Attention

#### 3.2. DenseNet

#### 3.3. Bidirectional Gated Recurrent Unit

#### 3.4. Global Average Pooling

#### 3.5. Model Training Environment

## 4. Results

- Performance evaluation of the HR and EE estimation models;
- Performance analysis with and without the attention mechanism;
- Analysis of the channel significance using the attention weight;

#### 4.1. Energy Expenditure Estimation

#### 4.1.1. Proposed Model Performance

#### 4.1.2. Channel-Wise Attention Effectiveness

#### 4.1.3. Optimal Sensor Analysis

#### 4.2. Heart Rate Estimation

#### 4.2.1. Proposed Model Performance

#### 4.2.2. Channel-Wise Attention Effectiveness

#### 4.2.3. Optimal Sensor Analysis

## 5. Discussion

## 6. Conclusions

## Author Contributions

## Funding

## Institutional Review Board Statement

## Informed Consent Statement

## Data Availability Statement

## Conflicts of Interest

## Abbreviations

IoT | Internet of Things |

EE | Energy expenditure |

PA | Physical activity |

CVD | Cardiovascular disease |

HRV | Heart rate variability |

HR | Heart rate |

ECG | Electrocardiogram |

PPG | Photoplethysmogram |

ANN | Artificial neural network |

CNN | Convolutional neural network |

GRU | Gated recurrent unit |

GAP | Global average pooling |

Bi-GRU | Bidirectional gated recurrent unit |

FC | Fully connected |

MSE | Mean squared error |

LOSO | Leave-one-subject-out |

RMSE | Root-mean-square error |

MAE | Mean absolute error |

${R}^{2}$ | Coefficient of determination |

LOA | Limit of agreement |

MAPE | Mean absolute percent error |

ANOVA | Analysis of variance |

## References

- Park, S.; Jayaraman, S. Enhancing the quality of life through wearable technology. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Mag.
**2003**, 22, 41–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Seneviratne, S.; Hu, Y.; Nguyen, T.; Lan, G.; Khalifa, S.; Thilakarathna, K.; Hassan, M.; Seneviratne, A. A survey of wearable devices and challenges. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor.
**2017**, 19, 2573–2620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Grand View Research, Inc. Wearable Technology Market Size, Share & Trends Analysis Report By Product (Wrist-wear, Eye-wear & Head-wear, Foot-wear, Neck-wear, Body-wear), By Application, By Region, Furthermore, Segment Forecasts, 2020–2027y. Available online: https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/wearable-technology-market (accessed on 27 May 2021).
- Ion, M.; Dinulescu, S.; Firtat, B.; Savin, M.; Ionescu, O.N.; Moldovan, C. Design and Fabrication of a New Wearable Pressure Sensor for Blood Pressure Monitoring. Sensors
**2021**, 21, 2075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Bonato, P. Advances in Wearable Technology and Applications in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil.
**2005**, 2, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Lin, F.; Wang, A.; Song, C.; Xu, W.; Li, Z.; Li, Q. A comparative study of smart insole on real-world step count. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium (SPMB), Philadelphia, PA, USA, 12 December 2015; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Fulk, G.D.; Sazonov, E. Using sensors to measure activity in people with stroke. Top. Stroke Rehabil.
**2011**, 18, 746–757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Fulk, G.D.; Edgar, S.R.; Bierwirth, R.; Hart, P.; Lopez-Meyer, P.; Sazonov, E. Identifying activity levels and steps in people with stroke using a novel shoe-based sensor. J. Neurol. Phys. Ther.
**2012**, 36, 100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Cho, H. Design and implementation of a lightweight smart insole for gait analysis. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE Trustcom/BigDataSE/ICESS, Sydney, NSW, Australia, 1–4 August 2017; pp. 792–797. [Google Scholar]
- Benocci, M.; Rocchi, L.; Farella, E.; Chiari, L.; Benini, L. A wireless system for gait and posture analysis based on pressure insoles and Inertial Measurement Units. In Proceedings of the 2009 3rd International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare, London, UK, 1–3 April 2009; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Lin, F.; Wang, A.; Zhuang, Y.; Tomita, M.R.; Xu, W. Smart insole: A wearable sensor device for unobtrusive gait monitoring in daily life. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform.
**2016**, 12, 2281–2291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Truong, P.H.; Lee, J.; Kwon, A.R.; Jeong, G.M. Stride counting in human walking and walking distance estimation using insole sensors. Sensors
**2016**, 16, 823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ngueleu, A.M.; Blanchette, A.K.; Bouyer, L.; Maltais, D.; McFadyen, B.J.; Moffet, H.; Batcho, C.S. Design and accuracy of an instrumented insole using pressure sensors for step count. Sensors
**2019**, 19, 984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Sazonova, N.; Browning, R.C.; Sazonov, E. Accurate prediction of energy expenditure using a shoe-based activity monitor. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc.
**2011**, 43, 1312–1321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Surgeon General’s Call to Action to Prevent and Decrease Overweight and Obesity; US Government Printing Office: Rockville, MD, USA, 2001.
- Blair, S.N.; Kohl, H.W.; Gordon, N.F.; Paffenbarger, R.S., Jr. How much physical activity is good for health? Annu. Rev. Public Health
**1992**, 13, 99–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Manley, A.F. Physical Activity and Health: A Report of the Surgeon General; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: Atlanta, GA, USA, 1996.
- Crouter, S.E.; Clowers, K.G.; Bassett, D.R., Jr. A novel method for using accelerometer data to predict energy expenditure. J. Appl. Physiol.
**2006**, 100, 1324–1331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Nielson, R.; Vehrs, P.R.; Fellingham, G.W.; Hager, R.; Prusak, K.A. Step counts and energy expenditure as estimated by pedometry during treadmill walking at different stride frequencies. J. Phys. Act. Health
**2011**, 8, 1004–1013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Chen, K.Y.; Sun, M. Improving energy expenditure estimation by using a triaxial accelerometer. J. Appl. Physiol.
**1997**, 83, 2112–2122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Staudenmayer, J.; Pober, D.; Crouter, S.; Bassett, D.; Freedson, P. An artificial neural network to estimate physical activity energy expenditure and identify physical activity type from an accelerometer. J. Appl. Physiol.
**2009**, 107, 1300–1307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Voleno, M.; Redmond, S.J.; Cerutti, S.; Lovell, N.H. Energy expenditure estimation using triaxial accelerometry and barometric pressure measurement. In Proceedings of the 2010 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 31 August–4 September 2010; pp. 5185–5188. [Google Scholar]
- Vathsangam, H.; Emken, A.; Schroeder, E.T.; Spruijt-Metz, D.; Sukhatme, G.S. Determining energy expenditure from treadmill walking using hip-worn inertial sensors: An experimental study. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng.
**2011**, 58, 2804–2815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version] - World Health Organization. Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Thayer, J.F.; Yamamoto, S.S.; Brosschot, J.F. The relationship of autonomic imbalance, heart rate variability and cardiovascular disease risk factors. Int. J. Cardiol.
**2010**, 141, 122–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Lee, E.S.; Lee, J.S.; Joo, M.C.; Kim, J.H.; Noh, S.E. Accuracy of heart rate measurement using smartphones during treadmill exercise in male patients with ischemic heart disease. Ann. Rehabil. Med.
**2017**, 41, 129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Lee, H.; Lee, H.; Whang, M. An enhanced method to estimate heart rate from seismocardiography via ensemble averaging of body movements at six degrees of freedom. Sensors
**2018**, 18, 238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version] - Shashikumar, S.P.; Shah, A.J.; Li, Q.; Clifford, G.D.; Nemati, S. A deep learning approach to monitoring and detecting atrial fibrillation using wearable technology. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE EMBS International Conference on Biomedical & Health Informatics (BHI), Orlando, FL, USA, 16–19 February 2017; pp. 141–144. [Google Scholar]
- Ravi, D.; Wong, C.; Lo, B.; Yang, G.Z. A deep learning approach to on-node sensor data analytics for mobile or wearable devices. IEEE J. Biomed. Health Inform.
**2016**, 21, 56–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version] - Gotlibovych, I.; Crawford, S.; Goyal, D.; Liu, J.; Kerem, Y.; Benaron, D.; Yilmaz, D.; Marcus, G.; Li, Y. End-to-end deep learning from raw sensor data: Atrial fibrillation detection using wearables. arXiv
**2018**, arXiv:1807.10707. [Google Scholar] - Faust, O.; Hagiwara, Y.; Hong, T.J.; Lih, O.S.; Acharya, U.R. Deep learning for healthcare applications based on physiological signals: A review. Comput. Methods Progr. Biomed.
**2018**, 161, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Yin, Z.; Zhao, M.; Wang, Y.; Yang, J.; Zhang, J. Recognition of emotions using multimodal physiological signals and an ensemble deep learning model. Comput. Methods Progr. Biomed.
**2017**, 140, 93–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Zhu, J.; Pande, A.; Mohapatra, P.; Han, J.J. Using deep learning for energy expenditure estimation with wearable sensors. In Proceedings of the 2015 17th International Conference on E-health Networking, Application & Services (HealthCom), Boston, MA, USA, 14–17 October 2015; pp. 501–506. [Google Scholar]
- Yao, X.; Li, X.; Ye, Q.; Huang, Y.; Cheng, Q.; Zhang, G.Q. A robust deep learning approach for automatic classification of seizures against non-seizures. arXiv
**2018**, arXiv:1812.06562. [Google Scholar] - Fu, L.; Lu, B.; Nie, B.; Peng, Z.; Liu, H.; Pi, X. Hybrid Network with Attention Mechanism for Detection and Location of Myocardial Infarction Based on 12-Lead Electrocardiogram Signals. Sensors
**2020**, 20, 1020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version] - Yao, Q.; Wang, R.; Fan, X.; Liu, J.; Li, Y. Multi-class Arrhythmia detection from 12 to lead varied-length ECG using Attention-based Time-Incremental Convolutional Neural Network. Inf. Fusion
**2020**, 53, 174–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Gunning, D. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (xai); Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA): Arlington, VA, USA, 2017; Volume 2. [Google Scholar]
- Busseti, E.; Osband, I.; Wong, S. Deep Learning for Time Series Modeling; Technical Report; Stanford University: Stanford, CA, USA, 2012; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
- Huang, G.; Liu, Z.; Van Der Maaten, L.; Weinberger, K.Q. Densely connected convolutional networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Honolulu, HI, USA, 21–26 July 2017; pp. 4700–4708. [Google Scholar]
- Cho, K.; Van Merriënboer, B.; Gulcehre, C.; Bahdanau, D.; Bougares, F.; Schwenk, H.; Bengio, Y. Learning phrase representations using RNN encoder-decoder for statistical machine translation. arXiv
**2014**, arXiv:1406.1078. [Google Scholar] - Lin, M.; Chen, Q.; Yan, S. Network in network. arXiv
**2013**, arXiv:1312.4400. [Google Scholar] - Han, J.; Moraga, C. The influence of the sigmoid function parameters on the speed of backpropagation learning. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Artificial Neural Networks, Torremolinos, Spain, 7–9 June 1995; pp. 195–201. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, J.; Lu, C.; Li, X.; Kim, H.J.; Wang, J. A full convolutional network based on DenseNet for remote sensing scene classification. Math. Biosci. Eng.
**2019**, 16, 3345–3367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Zhang, K.; Guo, Y.; Wang, X.; Yuan, J.; Ding, Q. Multiple feature reweight densenet for image classification. IEEE Access
**2019**, 7, 9872–9880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Tao, Y.; Xu, M.; Lu, Z.; Zhong, Y. DenseNet-based depth-width double reinforced deep learning neural network for high-resolution remote sensing image per-pixel classification. Remote Sens.
**2018**, 10, 779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Tong, W.; Chen, W.; Han, W.; Li, X.; Wang, L. Channel-attention-based DenseNet network for remote sensing image scene classification. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Obs. Remote Sens.
**2020**, 13, 4121–4132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Hochreiter, S.; Schmidhuber, J. Long short-term memory. Neural Comput.
**1997**, 9, 1735–1780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Kingma, D.P.; Ba, J. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. arXiv
**2014**, arXiv:1412.6980. [Google Scholar] - Altman, D.G.; Bland, J.M. Measurement in medicine: The analysis of method comparison studies. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. D Stat.
**1983**, 32, 307–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Nelson, B.W.; Allen, N.B. Accuracy of consumer wearable heart rate measurement during an ecologically valid 24-hour period: Intraindividual validation study. JMIR mHealth uHealth
**2019**, 7, e10828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Javed, A.R.; Sarwar, M.U.; Khan, S.; Iwendi, C.; Mittal, M.; Kumar, N. Analyzing the effectiveness and contribution of each axis of tri-axial accelerometer sensor for accurate activity recognition. Sensors
**2020**, 20, 2216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version] - Smith, M.P.; Horsch, A.; Standl, M.; Heinrich, J.; Schulz, H. Uni-and triaxial accelerometric signals agree during daily routine, but show differences between sports. Sci. Rep.
**2018**, 8, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version] - Ceesay, S.M.; Prentice, A.M.; Day, K.C.; Murgatroyd, P.R.; Goldberg, G.R.; Scott, W.; Spurr, G. The use of heart rate monitoring in the estimation of energy expenditure: A validation study using indirect whole-body calorimetry. Br. J. Nutr.
**1989**, 61, 175–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]

**Figure 2.**Locations of the sensors in the smart shoes: (

**a**) a total of 12 sensors (6 sensors on the left and right shoe each) consisting of the pressure, accelerometer, and gyroscope sensors; (

**b**) locations of the pressure sensors on the anatomical sketch: 1st metatarsal head (MH; sensor 1), toe (between the 1st and 2nd phalange; sensor 2), 4th metatarsal head (sensor 3), and heel (sensor 4).

**Figure 3.**Example figures of the experimental equipment and process. During the experiment, participants wore a chest strap and a calorimeter to measure HR and EE, respectively. Each participant ran on a treadmill at a speed varying from 3 to 10 kph, which increased by 1 kph per every 2 min (total 16 min ran) and they were instructed to run at a constant speed as much as possible.

**Figure 4.**Flowchart of the data preprocessing when training the proposed deep learning model. The input shoes’ data were recorded at a 33.3 Hz sampling rate and standardized to have a zero mean and unit variance. The label was created based on the HR and EE information, which were averaged on a 10 s long window with an overlap of 1 s.

**Figure 5.**Application of a linear interpolation method due to the mismatch between the sampling rates of the HR/EE and data of the shoes’ sensors. In the HR and EE graphs, the green dot represents HR and the gold dot represents the EE of the actual measurement, and the dashed line is the estimated value.

**Figure 6.**Distributions of HR and EE labels: (

**a**,

**b**) show the number of EE values per KCal/min and HR values per bpm, respectively.

**Figure 11.**Comparison between the predicted (EST) and ground truths (REF) in EE estimation: (

**a**) is the best case; (

**b**) is the worst case.

**Figure 12.**Bland-Altman plot of EE estimation. The orange line is the limit of agreement (LOA) and the center blue line is the mean of difference error between the actual and estimation.

**Figure 13.**Comparison between predicted (EST) and ground truths (REF) in HR estimation: (

**a**) is the best case; and (

**b**) is the worst case.

**Figure 14.**Bland–Altman plot of HR estimation. The orange line represents the limit of agreement (LOA) and the blue center line is the mean of the difference error between the ground truth and the estimation.

**Figure 15.**Comparison of the average attention weights for each of the x, y, and z axes. (

**A**,

**B**) illustrate the result of EE and HR, respectively.

Input | RMSE | MAE | ${\mathit{R}}^{2}$ |
---|---|---|---|

Acc + Gyro + Pr | 1.05 ± 0.13 | 0.83 ± 0.12 | 0.922 ± 0.005 |

**Table 2.**Mean and standard deviation of RMSE, MAE, and ${R}^{2}$ values obtained using the proposed models with and without the attention mechanism in the EE estimation.

Input | RMSE | MAE | ${\mathit{R}}^{2}$ |
---|---|---|---|

with attention (proposed) | 1.05 ± 0.13 | 0.83 ± 0.12 | 0.922 ± 0.005 |

without attention | 1.17 ± 0.24 | 0.95 ± 0.2 | 0.923 ± 0.12 |

**Table 3.**ANOVA analysis of the channel-wise attention weights in the EE estimation. SS is the sum of squares, df is the degree of freedom, MS is the mean square, and F is the F-statistic.

SS | df | MS | F | p-Value | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|

beetween groups | 1.216 | 19 | 0.064 | 55.107 | 0.000 |

within groups | 22.434 | 19,320 | 0.001 | ||

total | 23.649 | 19,339 |

**Table 4.**Post-hoc Tukey HSD test result for the averaged attention weight for each sensor in EE estimation. Each column 1–10 represents a homogeneous subset for a significance level of $0.05$. The sensor types are pressure (P), accelerometer (A), and gyroscope (G). The first subscript for each sensor type denotes the left (L) and right (R) sides of the shoe. The second subscript is the detailed attachment position of the pressure sensor (see Figure 2) or the x, y, and z axis directions of the accelerometer and gyroscope.

Sensor Type | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

${P}_{L3}$ | 0.4908 | |||||||||

${P}_{R2}$ | 0.4910 | 0.4910 | ||||||||

${P}_{R4}$ | 0.4910 | 0.4910 | ||||||||

${P}_{L4}$ | 0.4918 | 0.4918 | ||||||||

${G}_{RY}$ | 0.4926 | 0.4926 | 0.4926 | |||||||

${P}_{R3}$ | 0.4935 | 0.4935 | 0.4935 | |||||||

${P}_{L1}$ | 0.4944 | 0.4944 | 0.4944 | 0.4944 | ||||||

${A}_{LY}$ | 0.4964 | 0.4964 | 0.4964 | 0.4964 | ||||||

${P}_{L2}$ | 0.4977 | 0.4977 | 0.4977 | 0.4977 | ||||||

${A}_{RX}$ | 0.4979 | 0.4979 | 0.4979 | 0.4979 | ||||||

${A}_{RY}$ | 0.4980 | 0.4980 | 0.4980 | 0.4980 | ||||||

${P}_{R1}$ | 0.4991 | 0.4991 | 0.4991 | |||||||

${A}_{LX}$ | 0.4998 | 0.4998 | 0.4998 | |||||||

${G}_{RX}$ | 0.4999 | 0.4999 | ||||||||

${G}_{LX}$ | 0.5031 | 0.5031 | ||||||||

${G}_{RZ}$ | 0.5070 | 0.5070 | ||||||||

${A}_{RZ}$ | 0.5091 | 0.5091 | ||||||||

${G}_{LY}$ | 0.5137 | 0.5137 | ||||||||

${G}_{LZ}$ | 0.5148 | |||||||||

${A}_{LZ}$ | 0.5155 | |||||||||

p-value | 0.742 | 0.069 | 0.057 | 0.060 | 0.750 | 0.072 | 0.546 | 0.999 | 0.240 | 1.000 |

Input | RMSE | MAE | ${\mathit{R}}^{2}$ |
---|---|---|---|

Acc + Gyro + Pr | 7.81 ± 1.12 | 6.12 ± 0.86 | 0.897 ± 0.017 |

**Table 6.**Comparison of the HR estimation performance of commercial wearable devices and the proposed model. The performance of commercial wearable devices was cited from the study results of Nelson et al. [50].

Device | Condition | Device Error | Bland–Altman Analysis | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

MAE | MAPE | ME | Lower LOA | Upper LOA | ||

Fitbit Charge 2 | walking | 9.55 | 9.21 | −6.85 | −28.51 | 14.81 |

running | 14.73 | 9.88 | −14.73 | −29.77 | 0.31 | |

Apple Watch 3 | walking | 4.77 | 4.64 | 0.11 | −14.18 | 14.41 |

running | 4.05 | 3.01 | 1.77 | −9.78 | 13.33 | |

proposed model | walking + running | 6.12 | 5.40 | 0.39 | −15.12 | 15.90 |

**Table 7.**Mean and standard deviation of RMSE, MAE, and ${R}^{2}$ values of models with (proposed model) and without the attention for HR estimation.

Input | RMSE | MAE | ${\mathit{R}}^{2}$ |
---|---|---|---|

with attention | 7.81 ± 1.12 | 6.12 ± 0.86 | 0.897 ± 0.017 |

without attention | 9.19 ± 3.16 | 7.72 ± 3.67 | 0.878 ± 0.037 |

**Table 8.**ANOVA analysis of the channel-wise attention weights in the HR estimation. SS denotes the sum of squares, df denotes the degree of freedom, MS denotes the mean square, and F denotes the F-statistic.

SS | df | MS | F | p-Value | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|

beetween groups | 2.145 | 19 | 0.113 | 90.706 | 0.000 |

within groups | 24.049 | 19,320 | 0.001 | ||

total | 26.194 | 19,339 |

**Table 9.**Post-hoc Tukey HSD test result for the average attention weight for each sensor in HR estimation. Each column 1–8 represents a homogeneous subset for a significance level of $0.05$.

Sensor Type | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

${P}_{R3}$ | 0.4864 | |||||||

${P}_{L3}$ | 0.4871 | |||||||

${P}_{R1}$ | 0.4888 | |||||||

${P}_{R4}$ | 0.4893 | |||||||

${P}_{R2}$ | 0.4900 | 0.4900 | ||||||

${P}_{L4}$ | 0.4901 | 0.4901 | ||||||

${G}_{RY}$ | 0.4911 | 0.4911 | 0.4911 | |||||

${A}_{LX}$ | 0.4952 | 0.4952 | ||||||

${A}_{RY}$ | 0.4954 | 0.4954 | ||||||

${P}_{L1}$ | 0.4956 | 0.4956 | ||||||

${A}_{RX}$ | 0.4961 | |||||||

${P}_{L2}$ | 0.4963 | |||||||

${G}_{RX}$ | 0.5032 | |||||||

${A}_{LY}$ | 0.5064 | 0.5064 | ||||||

${G}_{LX}$ | 0.5067 | 0.5067 | ||||||

${G}_{RZ}$ | 0.5084 | 0.5084 | 0.5084 | |||||

${G}_{LZ}$ | 0.5099 | 0.5099 | ||||||

${G}_{LY}$ | 0.5141 | 0.5141 | ||||||

${A}_{RZ}$ | 0.5167 | |||||||

${A}_{LZ}$ | 0.5229 | |||||||

p-value | 0.288 | 0.061 | 0.122 | 0.130 | 0.794 | 0.056 | 0.986 | 1.000 |

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |

© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Eom, H.; Roh, J.; Hariyani, Y.S.; Baek, S.; Lee, S.; Kim, S.; Park, C.
Deep Learning-Based Optimal Smart Shoes Sensor Selection for Energy Expenditure and Heart Rate Estimation. *Sensors* **2021**, *21*, 7058.
https://doi.org/10.3390/s21217058

**AMA Style**

Eom H, Roh J, Hariyani YS, Baek S, Lee S, Kim S, Park C.
Deep Learning-Based Optimal Smart Shoes Sensor Selection for Energy Expenditure and Heart Rate Estimation. *Sensors*. 2021; 21(21):7058.
https://doi.org/10.3390/s21217058

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Eom, Heesang, Jongryun Roh, Yuli Sun Hariyani, Suwhan Baek, Sukho Lee, Sayup Kim, and Cheolsoo Park.
2021. "Deep Learning-Based Optimal Smart Shoes Sensor Selection for Energy Expenditure and Heart Rate Estimation" *Sensors* 21, no. 21: 7058.
https://doi.org/10.3390/s21217058