OntoAR-HAR: Ontology-Guided Agentic RAG with Personalized Memory for Human Activity Recognition
Authors: Xiangqing Lu, Tao Zhu, Liang Yu, Shuangjian Li, Lulu Ban, Furong Duan, Mingxing Nie, Liming Chen, +1 more
Organizations: School of Computer Science, University of South China, Hengyang, China · School of Computer Science and Technology, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, China · Hunan University, Changsha, China · School of Computing, Ulster University, Belfast, United Kingdom
LLMs increasingly support sensor-based human activity recognition (HAR) by linking motion signals with activity semantics and physical knowledge. Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) grounds decisions in sensor examples and domain features, enabling training-free target-user inference with less dependence on raw numerical arrays. However, existing LLM/RAG-based HAR typically searches single-level activity spaces using static population knowledge. Consequently, they compare many unrelated candidates using the same static population evidence and overlook personalized motion patterns. We propose OntoAR-HAR, an ontology-guided agentic RAG framework combining static population and personalized knowledge. Its tree-structured activity ontology decomposes classification into local decisions among semantically related activities. The static store supplies node-constrained examples, while offline-discovered executable signal features provide numerical evidence for local distinctions. During inference, the personalized store collects selected user observations, which the LLM integrates with static knowledge and signal features while traversing the ontology to an activity label. Cross-subject and heterogeneous-sensing experiments show complementary gains from hierarchical retrieval and personalized memory across multiple LLM backbones, achieving state-of-the-art performance. By explicitly modeling hierarchical relations across activity granularities, OntoAR-HAR also addresses the long-overlooked semantic inclusion problem and avoids treating related labels as independent categories.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1: Offline construction. The activity hierarchy is manually grouped and refined using retrieval-only confusions on balanced training samples. Source embeddings form the static population store; an LLM iteratively proposes signal features whose executable implementations are evaluated on confused examples.
Feature family
Representative statistics or derived quantities
Time-domain statistics
Mean, standard deviation, variance, maximum, minimum, median, root mean square, peak, range, interquartile range, skewness, kurtosis, and signal magnitude area.
Frequency-domain statistics
Low-, mid-, and high-frequency band powers and their ratios; dominant frequency and power; secondary peak frequency; spectral centroid, entropy, skewness, and kurtosis; weighted mean frequency; and spectral energy.
Short-time Fourier transform
Maximum, mean, and standard deviation in each frequency band, plus statistics of short-time spectral entropy and spectral centroid.
Change and impact
Mean, root mean square, and standard deviation of first differences; zero-crossing rate; impact rate of change; and peaks.
Periodicity and dependence
First autocorrelation peak, first minimum, and first zero crossing; fourth-order autoregressive coefficients; and recurrence rate.
Multiscale complexity
Wavelet-packet energy and permutation entropy.
TABLE I: Representative Signal-Feature Families Considered during Offline Construction. The Rule-Based Generator Implements Supported Candidates; the Validated Feature Set Is Specific to Each Decision Node.
Fig. 2: Online inference. At each ontology node, retrieval is restricted to the current subtree. Static population examples, personalized examples, and executable-feature reports form the decision context; the selected child determines the next local problem.
Method
Metric
Easy
Medium
Hard
Avg.
Opp.
UCI-HAR
Shoaib
PAMAP2
USC-HAD
Mhealth
WISDM
DSADS
# Classes
4
6
7
12
12
12
18
19
–
# Channels
30
6
30
18
6
15
6
30
–
Cross-modal alignment (full-shot)
ImageBind
Acc
82.8
90.9
98.5
94.3
52.1
82.9
77.2
90.0
83.6
F1
84.6
90.7
98.5
94.6
52.2
83.2
76.8
89.3
83.7
TABLE II: Cross-Subject Results (%). Acc and Macro-F1 Are Shown in Separate Rows. The Dataset Descriptors Give the Number of Activity Classes and Sensor Channels; OntoAR-HAR Reports the Mean with Standard Deviation as a Subscript over Ten Random Samples. Best Results Are Bold, and Second-Best Results Are Underlined.
Hierarchical F1 (%)
Dataset
Single
Hier.
Δ
Dataset
Single
Hier.
Δ
DSADS
95.26
96.05
+0.79
Shoaib
99.29
99.52
+0.23
Mhealth
89.31
91.04
+1.73
UCI-HAR
96.67
97.50
+0.83
Opp.
89.50
92.75
+3.25
USC-HAD
78.54
81.11
+2.57
PAMAP2
89.03
89.58
+0.55
WISDM
81.77
82.99
+1.22
Avg.
89.92
91.32
+1.40
TABLE III: Semantic-Inclusion Evaluation. The Upper Block Reports Dataset-Level Hierarchical F1; the Lower Block Gives Overall Metrics. Percentage Changes Are in Points.
Fig. 3: Controlled component study with Gemini 2.5 Flash. Each vertical bar starts from single-level retrieval; the upper segments show the incremental gains from hierarchy and personalized memory.
Method
UCI-HAR
PAMAP2
USC-HAD
Mhealth
DSADS
Average
Acc
F1
Acc
F1
Acc
F1
Acc
F1
Acc
F1
Acc
F1
ImageBind
14.1
5.0
14.6
8.1
11.8
7.3
7.9
1.7
2.1
1.2
10.1
4.7
IMU2CLIP
17.8
11.4
1.9
1.1
12.8
9.3
7.9
1.3
4.6
1.1
9.0
4.8
IMUGPT
1.1
0.3
8.9
1.5
6.0
6.9
9.8
2.5
7.5
2.0
6.7
2.6
HARGPT
15.0
12.7
11.1
2.1
9.5
3.6
10.4
7.4
5.8
3.4
10.4
5.8
ZARA
16.7
4.9
17.1
8.6
16.7
4.8
20.0
6.7
16.7
6.8
17.4
6.4
TABLE IV: Heterogeneous-Dataset Results (%) over Six Harmonized Activity Categories without Body-Location Filtering. Acc and Macro-F1 Are Shown Side by Side. Best Results Are Bold, and Second-Best Results Are Underlined.
Fig. 4: Example decision path. Static population retrieval, personalized retrieval, and node-specific feature reports are kept separate in the context, allowing the final decision to be traced through the ontology.
Backbone
Opp.
UCI
Shoaib
PAMAP2
USC
Mhealth
WISDM
DSADS
Avg.
Acc
F1
Acc
F1
Acc
F1
Acc
F1
Acc
F1
Acc
F1
Acc
F1
Acc
F1
Acc
F1
Gemini 2.0 Flash
83.00
82.71
92.50
92.33
96.19
96.19
85.42
85.94
71.67
71.60
85.83
85.51
78.12
77.30
90.53
90.44
85.41
85.25
Gemini 2.5 Flash
92.50
92.51
95.42
95.38
100.00
100.00
85.83
86.01
74.58
74.60
90.42
89.33
79.51
78.54
93.68
93.05
88.99
88.68
Gemini 3.0 Flash
90.50
90.62
94.17
94.09
100.00
100.00
89.17
89.49
82.50
82.01
89.58
89.45
80.90
80.27
94.74
94.79
90.20
90.09
DeepSeek R1
80.50
80.28
94.12
94.17
96.67
96.66
85.00
85.22
71.25
71.50
78.33
77.80
79.51
78.66
92.63
91.98
84.75
84.53
Grok 4
85.50
85.41
92.50
92.44
99.52
99.52
87.50
87.90
72.50
72.41
85.00
84.58
78.82
77.83
93.15
92.78
86.81
86.61
TABLE V: Detailed Performance of Different LLM Backbones in the Controlled Comparison (%). Accuracy and Macro-F1 Are Shown Side by Side. Best Results Are Bold, and Second-Best Results Are Underlined.
Dataset (C/W)
Ret. (s)
LLM (s)
Tokens (K)
Cost
DSADS (30/125)
0.057
1.39
1.91/0.35/2.25
0.001442
Mhealth (15/100)
0.036
1.67
1.29/0.31/1.60
0.001170
Opportunity (30/60)
0.077
2.59
2.71/0.50/3.20
0.002055
PAMAP2 (18/200)
0.054
2.52
2.31/0.45/2.76
0.001822
Shoaib (30/100)
0.092
1.48
1.61/0.47/2.08
0.001655
UCI-HAR (6/128)
0.019
4.96
1.03/0.18/1.22
0.000768
TABLE VI: Per-Query Efficiency with Gemini 2.5 Flash. C/W Denotes Channels/Window; Ret. Is Local Retrieval Time; Tokens (K) Are Prompt/Completion/Total, with the Total Computed before Rounding; Cost Is in USD.
Fig. 5: Retrieval-only accuracy and the change obtained after LLM reasoning with the same retrieved evidence. Positive changes occur on all eight datasets.
Human Activity Recognition (HAR) from wearable sensors supports applications in healthcare, rehabilitation, fitness tracking, and smart environments. Yet, existing deep learning approaches require dataset-specific training, large labeled corpora, and repeated adaptation to new sensor settings or activity taxonomies. Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Human Activity Recognition (RAG-HAR) addresses this by framing HAR as a training-free, retrieval-augmented task, in which statistical descriptions of sensor windows are used to retrieve similar labeled examples that guide LLM-based classification. We introduce RAG-HAR+, a retrieval-first and cost-optimized extension that strengthens retrieval while reducing dependence on LLM-based inference. RAG-HAR+ uses an offline Retrieval Designer Agent to design dataset-specific feature groups from a diverse pool of motion descriptors, enabling sensor windows to be compared using features better aligned with dataset-specific activity patterns. During inference, RAG-HAR+ uses majority voting over retrieved neighbors for samples with strong retrieval evidence and defers only uncertain cases to an LLM-based Ambiguity Resolver Agent. Across six HAR benchmarks, RAG-HAR+ maintains competitive or improved performance while reducing LLM usage, token consumption, and inference time. We further extend the RAG-HAR mobile prototype to demonstrate the practical feasibility of retrieval-first, LLM-assisted HAR in mobile sensing scenarios.
Large language models (LLMs) offer a new approach to wearable-sensor-based human activity recognition. Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) further introduces similar motion examples and discriminative sensor knowledge, enabling decisions grounded in observations relevant to the current query. More evidence, however, does not necessarily mean better-organized evidence. When online prompts and LLM agents primarily orchestrate inference, decisions about which activities to compare and when to invoke discriminative knowledge remain concentrated at inference time. As the activity vocabulary grows, the model must repeatedly process more candidates and associated knowledge, whereas pruning candidates too early risks excluding the true activity. We propose confusion-hierarchy evidence-aware reasoning (CHEAR), which moves part of this knowledge organization offline. CHEAR constructs and validates an activity hierarchy from recurrent cross-subject retrieval errors and builds corresponding activity-pair knowledge. At inference time, the hierarchy orders candidate comparisons; the LLM retains candidates progressively, and local discriminative knowledge is accessed only for the remaining activities. Across eight datasets, CHEAR achieves 86.79% mean cross-subject accuracy, a 75.91% candidate reduction rate, and 96.44% true-activity retention. Per-sample token use is 85.15% lower on average than in a variant without the hierarchical structure. Mean accuracy across eight cross-dataset transfer directions is 88.81%. These results show that organizing candidates and discriminative knowledge around observed activity confusions reduces online LLM input while maintaining recognition performance.
HAR is increasingly expected to run continuously on edge devices, yet recent LLM-based methods remain hard to deploy: raw sensor prompts are long, cloud inference adds latency and privacy risk, and fine-tuned LLM pipelines turn general-purpose models into task-specific classifiers. We present STELLA, an efficient sensor-to-LLM translation framework for on-device HAR that shifts the burden from LLM adaptation to sensor tokenization. A lightweight hierarchical tokenizer compresses an entire multi-channel inertial window into a fixed set of compact latent sensor tokens, which are projected into the embedding space of a frozen pretrained LLM and combined with a natural-language prompt for label scoring. This preserves activity-relevant temporal and cross-channel structure while keeping LLM-side computation predictable across sensor configurations. STELLA also supports on-device personalization, adapting only the lightweight tokenizer on small amounts of user-specific labelled data and augmenting inference with a local retrieval context, keeping the LLM, user data, and retrieval on device. Across seven public HAR datasets and eight benchmark settings, STELLA achieves new state-of-the-art performance, improving over prior methods by up to 11.83% F1; on-device personalization yields up to a further 21.91% F1 as user data accumulates after deployment. STELLA also outperforms representative time-series tokenizers under the same LLM pipeline and achieves real-time inference under practical mobile and edge budgets, showing that efficient sensor tokenization is a practical path toward accurate, private, and personalized LLM-based HAR on edge devices.
Nirhoshan Sivaroopan, Albert Zomaya, Kanchana Thilakarathna