skip to main content
10.1145/2750858.2807551acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesubicompConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Let's (not) stick together: pairwise similarity biases cross-validation in activity recognition

Published: 07 September 2015 Publication History

Abstract

The ability to generalise towards either new users or unforeseen behaviours is a key requirement for activity recognition systems in ubiquitous computing. Differences in recognition performance for the two application cases can be significant, and user-dependent performance is typically assumed to be an upper bound on performance. We demonstrate that this assumption does not hold for the widely used cross-validation evaluation scheme that is typically employed both during system bootstrapping and for reporting results. We describe how the characteristics of segmented time-series data render random cross-validation a poor fit, as adjacent segments are not statistically independent. We develop an alternative approach -- meta-segmented cross validation -- that explicitly circumvents this issue and evaluate it on two data-sets. Results indicate a significant drop in performance across a variety of feature extraction and classification methods if this bias is removed, and that prolonged, repetitive activities are particularly affected.

References

[1]
Alshurafa, N., Xu, W., Liu, J. J., Huang, M.-C., Mortazavi, B., Roberts, C. K., and Sarrafzadeh, M. Designing a robust activity recognition framework for health and exergaming using wearable sensors. Biomedical and Health Informatics, IEEE Journal of 18, 5 (2014), 1636--1646.
[2]
Anjum, A., and Ilyas, M. U. Activity recognition using smartphone sensors. In Consumer Communications and Networking Conference (CCNC), 2013 IEEE, IEEE (2013), 914--919.
[3]
Berlin, E., and Van Laerhoven, K. Detecting leisure activities with dense motif discovery. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Conference on Ubiquitous Computing, ACM (2012), 250--259.
[4]
Bishop, C. M., et al. Pattern recognition and machine learning, vol. 4. springer New York, 2006.
[5]
Blum, A., Kalai, A., and Langford, J. Beating the hold-out: Bounds for k-fold and progressive cross-validation. In Proceedings of the twelfth annual conference on Computational learning theory, ACM (1999), 203--208.
[6]
Bogomolov, A., Lepri, B., Ferron, M., Pianesi, F., and Pentland, A. S. Pervasive stress recognition for sustainable living. In Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PERCOM Workshops), 2014 IEEE International Conference on, IEEE (2014), 345--350.
[7]
Bulling, A., Blanke, U., and Schiele, B. A tutorial on human activity recognition using body-worn inertial sensors. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 46, 3 (2014), 33.
[8]
Chang, C.-C., and Lin, C.-J. Libsvm: a library for support vector machines. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology (TIST) 2, 3 (2011), 27.
[9]
Figo, D., Diniz, P. C., Ferreira, D. R., and Cardoso, J. M. Preprocessing techniques for context recognition from accelerometer data. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 14, 7 (2010), 645--662.
[10]
Gjoreski, H., Kaluža, B., Gams, M., Milić, R., and Luštrek, M. Ensembles of multiple sensors for human energy expenditure estimation. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM international joint conference on Pervasive and ubiquitous computing, ACM (2013), 359--362.
[11]
Gu, W., Yang, Z., Shangguan, L., Sun, W., Jin, K., and Liu, Y. Intelligent sleep stage mining service with smartphones. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing, ACM (2014), 649--660.
[12]
Gupta, P., and Dallas, T. Feature selection and activity recognition system using a single tri-axial accelerometer.
[13]
Hall, M., Frank, E., Holmes, G., Pfahringer, B., Reutemann, P., and Witten, I. H. The weka data mining software: an update. ACM SIGKDD explorations newsletter 11, 1 (2009), 10--18.
[14]
Hammerla, N. Y., Fisher, J. M., Andras, P., Rochester, L., Walker, R., and Plötz, T. Pd disease state assessment in naturalistic environments using deep learning.
[15]
Hammerla, N. Y., Kirkham, R., Andras, P., and Ploetz, T. On preserving statistical characteristics of accelerometry data using their empirical cumulative distribution. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Symposium on Wearable Computers, ACM (2013), 65--68.
[16]
Hirano, T., and Maekawa, T. A hybrid unsupervised/supervised model for group activity recognition. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Symposium on Wearable Computers, ACM (2013), 21--24.
[17]
Hung, H., Englebienne, G., and Kools, J. Classifying social actions with a single accelerometer. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM international joint conference on Pervasive and ubiquitous computing, ACM (2013), 207--210.
[18]
Keogh, E., Chu, S., Hart, D., and Pazzani, M. Segmenting time series: A survey and novel approach. Data mining in time series databases 57 (2004), 1--22.
[19]
Kim, J.-H. Estimating classification error rate: Repeated cross-validation, repeated hold-out and bootstrap. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 53, 11 (2009), 3735--3745.
[20]
Kose, M., Incel, O. D., and Ersoy, C. Online human activity recognition on smart phones. In Workshop on Mobile Sensing: From Smartphones and Wearables to Big Data (2012), 11--15.
[21]
Ladha, C., Hammerla, N., Hughes, E., Olivier, P., and Plötz, T. Dog's life: wearable activity recognition for dogs. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM international joint conference on Pervasive and ubiquitous computing, ACM (2013), 415--418.
[22]
Ladha, C., Hammerla, N. Y., Olivier, P., and Plötz, T. Climbax: Skill assessment for climbing enthusiasts. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM international joint conference on Pervasive and ubiquitous computing, ACM (2013), 235--244.
[23]
Lane, N. D., Pengyu, L., Zhou, L., and Zhao, F. Connecting personal-scale sensing and networked community behavior to infer human activities. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing, ACM (2014), 595--606.
[24]
Li, C.-Y., Chen, Y.-C., Chen, W.-J., Huang, P., and Chu, H.-h. Sensor-embedded teeth for oral activity recognition. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Symposium on Wearable Computers, ACM (2013), 41--44.
[25]
Park, J.-g., Patel, A., Curtis, D., Teller, S., and Ledlie, J. Online pose classification and walking speed estimation using handheld devices. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Conference on Ubiquitous Computing, ACM (2012), 113--122.
[26]
Peterek, T., Penhaker, M., Gajdoš, P., and Dohnálek, P. Comparison of classification algorithms for physical activity recognition. In Innovations in Bio-inspired Computing and Applications. Springer, 2014, 123--131.
[27]
Plötz, T., Hammerla, N. Y., Rozga, A., Reavis, A., Call, N., and Abowd, G. D. Automatic assessment of problem behavior in individuals with developmental disabilities. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Conference on Ubiquitous Computing, ACM (2012), 391--400.
[28]
Plötz, T., Moynihan, P., Pham, C., and Olivier, P. Activity recognition and healthier food preparation. In Activity Recognition in Pervasive Intelligent Environments. Springer, 2011, 313--329.
[29]
Reiss, A., Hendeby, G., and Stricker, D. Confidence-based multiclass adaboost for physical activity monitoring. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Symposium on Wearable Computers, ACM (2013), 13--20.
[30]
Reiss, A., and Stricker, D. Introducing a new benchmarked dataset for activity monitoring. In Wearable Computers (ISWC), 2012 16th International Symposium on, IEEE (2012), 108--109.
[31]
Reiss, A., and Stricker, D. Personalized mobile physical activity recognition. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Symposium on Wearable Computers, ACM (2013), 25--28.
[32]
Roggen, D., Calatroni, A., Rossi, M., Holleczek, T., Forster, K., Troster, G., Lukowicz, P., Bannach, D., Pirkl, G., Ferscha, A., et al. Collecting complex activity datasets in highly rich networked sensor environments. In Networked Sensing Systems (INSS), 2010 Seventh International Conference on, IEEE (2010), 233--240.
[33]
Shoaib, M., Scholten, H., and Havinga, P. J. Towards physical activity recognition using smartphone sensors. In Ubiquitous Intelligence and Computing, 2013 IEEE 10th International Conference on and 10th International Conference on Autonomic and Trusted Computing (UIC/ATC), IEEE (2013), 80--87.
[34]
Velloso, E., Bulling, A., Gellersen, H., Ugulino, W., and Fuks, H. Qualitative activity recognition of weight lifting exercises. In Proceedings of the 4th Augmented Human International Conference, ACM (2013), 116--123.
[35]
Ward, J. A., Lukowicz, P., and Gellersen, H. W. Performance metrics for activity recognition. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology (TIST) 2, 1 (2011), 6.
[36]
Wu, W., Dasgupta, S., Ramirez, E. E., Peterson, C., and Norman, G. J. Classification accuracies of physical activities using smartphone motion sensors. Journal of medical Internet research 14, 5 (2012), e130.

Cited By

View all
  • (2025)Validation of a Time-Distributed residual LSTM–CNN and BiLSTM for equine behavior recognition using collar-worn sensorsComputers and Electronics in Agriculture10.1016/j.compag.2025.109999231(109999)Online publication date: Apr-2025
  • (2024)Using Graphs to Perform Effective Sensor-Based Human Activity Recognition in Smart HomesSensors10.3390/s2412394424:12(3944)Online publication date: 18-Jun-2024
  • (2024)Wearable Sensor-Based Residual Multifeature Fusion Shrinkage Networks for Human Activity RecognitionSensors10.3390/s2403075824:3(758)Online publication date: 24-Jan-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
UbiComp '15: Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing
September 2015
1302 pages
ISBN:9781450335744
DOI:10.1145/2750858
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 07 September 2015

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. activity recognition
  2. cross validation
  3. evaluation
  4. model selection

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Funding Sources

Conference

UbiComp '15
Sponsor:
  • Yahoo! Japan
  • SIGMOBILE
  • FX Palo Alto Laboratory, Inc.
  • ACM
  • Rakuten Institute of Technology
  • Microsoft
  • Bell Labs
  • SIGCHI
  • Panasonic
  • Telefónica
  • ISTC-PC

Acceptance Rates

UbiComp '15 Paper Acceptance Rate 101 of 394 submissions, 26%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 764 of 2,912 submissions, 26%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)59
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)4
Reflects downloads up to 03 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2025)Validation of a Time-Distributed residual LSTM–CNN and BiLSTM for equine behavior recognition using collar-worn sensorsComputers and Electronics in Agriculture10.1016/j.compag.2025.109999231(109999)Online publication date: Apr-2025
  • (2024)Using Graphs to Perform Effective Sensor-Based Human Activity Recognition in Smart HomesSensors10.3390/s2412394424:12(3944)Online publication date: 18-Jun-2024
  • (2024)Wearable Sensor-Based Residual Multifeature Fusion Shrinkage Networks for Human Activity RecognitionSensors10.3390/s2403075824:3(758)Online publication date: 24-Jan-2024
  • (2024)Prediction Models and Feature Importance Analysis for Service State of Tunnel Sections Based on Machine LearningApplied Sciences10.3390/app1420916714:20(9167)Online publication date: 10-Oct-2024
  • (2024)Human Activity Recognition: A Comparative Study of Validation Methods and Impact of Feature Extraction in Wearable SensorsAlgorithms10.3390/a1712055617:12(556)Online publication date: 5-Dec-2024
  • (2024)Emotion Recognition on the Go: Utilizing Wearable IMUs for Personalized Emotion RecognitionCompanion of the 2024 on ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing10.1145/3675094.3678452(537-544)Online publication date: 5-Oct-2024
  • (2024)Game of LLMs: Discovering Structural Constructs in Activities using Large Language ModelsCompanion of the 2024 on ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing10.1145/3675094.3678444(487-492)Online publication date: 5-Oct-2024
  • (2024)REFORMS: Consensus-based Recommendations for Machine-learning-based ScienceScience Advances10.1126/sciadv.adk345210:18Online publication date: 3-May-2024
  • (2024)Deep Citywide Multisource Data Fusion-Based Air Quality EstimationIEEE Transactions on Cybernetics10.1109/TCYB.2023.324561854:1(111-122)Online publication date: Jan-2024
  • (2024)Too Good To Be True: accuracy overestimation in (re)current practices for Human Activity Recognition2024 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops and other Affiliated Events (PerCom Workshops)10.1109/PerComWorkshops59983.2024.10503465(511-517)Online publication date: 11-Mar-2024
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media