As the smartphones are equipped with various sensors such as the accelerometer, GPS, gravity sensor, gyros, ambient light sensor, proximity sensor, and so on, there have been many research works on making use of these sensors to create valuable applications. Human activity recognition is one such application that is motivated by various welfare applications such as the support for the elderly, measurement of calorie consumption, analysis of lifestyles, analysis of exercise patterns, and so on. One of the challenges faced when using the smartphone sensors for activity recognition is that the number of sensors used should be minimized to save the battery power. When the number of sensors used are restricted, it is difficult to realize a highly accurate activity recognizer or a classifier because it is hard to distinguish between subtly different activities relying on only limited information. The difficulty gets especially severe when the number of different activity classes to be distinguished is very large. In this paper, we show that a fairly accurate classifier can be built that can distinguish ten different activities by using only a single sensor data, i.e., the smartphone accelerometer data. The approach that we take to dealing with this ten-class problem is to use the ensemble of nested dichotomy (END) method that transforms a multi-class problem into multiple two-class problems. END builds a committee of binary classifiers in a nested fashion using a binary tree. At the root of the binary tree, the set of all the classes are split into two subsets of classes by using a binary classifier. At a child node of the tree, a subset of classes is again split into two smaller subsets by using another binary classifier. Continuing in this way, we can obtain a binary tree where each leaf node contains a single class. This binary tree can be viewed as a nested dichotomy that can make multi-class predictions. Depending on how a set of classes are split into two subsets at each node, the final tree that we obtain can be different. Since there can be some classes that are correlated, a particular tree may perform better than the others. However, we can hardly identify the best tree without deep domain knowledge. The END method copes with this problem by building multiple dichotomy trees randomly during learning, and then combining the predictions made by each tree during classification. The END method is generally known to perform well even when the base learner is unable to model complex decision boundaries As the base classifier at each node of the dichotomy, we have used another ensemble classifier called the random forest. A random forest is built by repeatedly generating a decision tree each time with a different random subset of features using a bootstrap sample. By combining bagging with random feature subset selection, a random forest enjoys the advantage of having more diverse ensemble members than a simple bagging. As an overall result, our ensemble of nested dichotomy can actually be seen as a committee of committees of decision trees that can deal with a multi-class problem with high accuracy. The ten classes of activities that we distinguish in this paper are 'Sitting', 'Standing', 'Walking', 'Running', 'Walking Uphill', 'Walking Downhill', 'Running Uphill', 'Running Downhill', 'Falling', and 'Hobbling'. The features used for classifying these activities include not only the magnitude of acceleration vector at each time point but also the maximum, the minimum, and the standard deviation of vector magnitude within a time window of the last 2 seconds, etc. For experiments to compare the performance of END with those of other methods, the accelerometer data has been collected at every 0.1 second for 2 minutes for each activity from 5 volunteers. Among these 5,900 ($=5{\times}(60{\times}2-2)/0.1$) data collected for each activity (the data for the first 2 seconds are trashed because they do not have time window data), 4,700 have been used for training and the rest for testing. Although 'Walking Uphill' is often confused with some other similar activities, END has been found to classify all of the ten activities with a fairly high accuracy of 98.4%. On the other hand, the accuracies achieved by a decision tree, a k-nearest neighbor, and a one-versus-rest support vector machine have been observed as 97.6%, 96.5%, and 97.6%, respectively.