diff --git a/tex_review/chapters/abstract.tex b/tex_review/chapters/abstract.tex
index ac0ff2e..6f7d05a 100644
--- a/tex_review/chapters/abstract.tex
+++ b/tex_review/chapters/abstract.tex
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ Instead of using time-consuming approaches like classic fingerprinting or measur
 %
 \add{This work provides three major contributions to the system.}
 \add{The most essential contribution is the novel state transition based on continuous walks along a navigation mesh, modeling only the building's walkable areas.}
-\add{The localization system is further updated by replacing the previous activity recognition with a threshold-based algorithm using barometer and accelerometer readings, allowing for continuous and smooth floor changes.}
+\add{The localization system is further updated by incorporating a threshold-based activity recognition using barometer and accelerometer readings, allowing for continuous and smooth floor changes.}
 \add{Within the scope of this work,} we tackle \del{advanced} problems like multimodal densities and sample impoverishment (system gets stuck) by introducing different countermeasures \del{, leading to a more robust localization}. 
 \add{For the latter, a simplification of our previous solution is presented for the first time, which does not involve any major changes to the particle filter.}
 %
diff --git a/tex_review/chapters/experiments.tex b/tex_review/chapters/experiments.tex
index db3986f..cc91093 100644
--- a/tex_review/chapters/experiments.tex
+++ b/tex_review/chapters/experiments.tex
@@ -408,8 +408,32 @@ Ironically, this is again some type of sample impoverishment, caused by the afor
 \subsection{Activity Recognition}
 \label{sec:eval:act}
 
-\commentByToni{Wie gut ist die Activity...}
+\add{In order to evaluate the activity recognition, a test person had to press a button according to their current state of motion, namely standing, walking, stairs up, stairs down, elevator up and elevator down (cf. fig. \ref{fig:simple}). 
+As the building does not have an elevator, this state is ignored in the following.
+Whether a state needs to be changed was indicated by small symbols on the ground truth markers. 
+This experiment is based on the same \SI{28}{} measurement series as section \ref{sec:exp:loc}.}
 
+\add{As the activity recognition uses moving windows, the detection suffers from a certain lag, depending on their size. 
+Thus, comparing each activity that is newly calculated with incoming barometer measurements with the ground truth at the current timestamp would result in a rather low detection rate for the respective activities.
+In addition, only a fraction of a test path consists of the change of an activity, since the testers were walking most of the time.  
+This would bias an overall detection rate.} 
+%Grafik die das zeigt. 
+
+\add{In order to be able to make a statement about the quality of the method, we first determined the average (time) lag within a single walk and then shifted the calculated data accordingly. 
+The lag is given as the difference between the timestamp, the activity changes in ground truth and the first timestamp of an interval, given by the size of $\vec{\omega}_\text{s}$, holding the same activity.  
+Applying this to the measurements series results in an overall detection rate of \SI{}{\percent}, with an average lag over all walks of \SI{}{\seconds} and a standard deviation of \SI{}{}. 
+The single activities ....} %einzelne werte
+
+\add{The main reason to utilize such a method was to detect floor changes.
+Independent of the detection rate above, the method is able to detect all floor changes of the conducted walks.
+This was quantified by comparing the duration of ...}
+%duration?! 
+
+
+\add{In average, there are \SI{xx}{\percent} false detected activity changes per tested walk. 
+This might seem a lot, however they only had an average duration of \SI{}{\second} ($\approx$ a single barometer update).}
+
+%Ende...
 
 
 %%estimation