skip to main content
10.1145/2753476.2753484acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmobisysConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Automatic Sensor Data Stream Segmentation for Real-time Activity Prediction in Smart Spaces

Published:18 May 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

Recently, human activity recognition and prediction have become important functionalities in ambient-assisted living. Activity inference algorithms detect what task a human undertakes, by analyzing the data stream pattern generated from various Internet of Things (IoT) devices. However, determining how the data stream should be segmented in real-time, referred to as data segmentation, remains as one of the most difficult challenges. In this paper, we propose an automatic data segmentation approach for real-time activity prediction by employing the Jaro-Winkler Distance measurement. Our approach selects a breakpoint of a stream by comparing the Jaro-Winkler distance between the training dataset and the data stream and finding a peak among the variations. The resultant segment also becomes new training data after being tagged; this removes the need to segment the stream data manually for humans. From the experiment based on MIT's smart home dataset collected from a real living environment, our approach shows reasonable performance of 76% accuracy even though the dataset size is relatively diminutive.

References

  1. J. A. Stankovic, Research directions for the Internet of Things, IEEE Internet Things J., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 3--9, Feb. 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. L. Chen, J. Hoey, C. D. Nugent, D. J. Cook, and Z. Yu, Sensor-based activity recognition. Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C: Applications and Reviews, IEEE Transactions on, 42(6), pp. 790--808, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. L. Bao, and S. S. Intille, Activity recognition from user-annotated acceleration data, In Pervasive computing, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 1--17, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. P., Palmes, H. K., Pung, T. Gu, W. Xue, and S. Chen, Object relevance weight pattern mining for activity recognition and segmentation, Pervasive and Mobile Computing, 6(1), pp. 43--57. 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. D. J. Cook, and N. Krishnan, Mining the home environment. Journal of intelligent information systems, 43(3), pp. 503--519, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. E. Kim, and S. Helal, Modeling human activity semantics for improved recognition performance. In Ubiquitous Intelligence and Computing, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 514--528, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. B. Kim, T. Kim, H. G. Ko, D. Lee, S. J. Hyun, and I. Y. Ko, Personal genie: a distributed framework for spontaneous interaction support with smart objects in a place. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Ubiquitous Information Management and Communication, ACM, pp. 97. Jan. 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. I. H., Bae, An ontology-based approach to ADL recognition in smart homes. Future Generation Computer Systems, 33, pp. 32--41, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Jaro-Winkler distance, {Online} available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaro%E2%80%93Winkler_distanceGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. G. Okeyo, L. Chen, H. Wang, and R. Sterritt, Dynamic sensor data segmentation for real-time knowledge-driven activity recognition. Pervasive and Mobile Computing, pp. 155--172, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. T. V. Kasteren, A. Noulas, G. Englebienne, and B. Kröse, Accurate activity recognition in a home setting. In Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Ubiquitous computing, ACM, pp. 1--9, Sep. 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. E. M. Tapia, S. S. Intille, and K. Larson, Activity recognition in the home using simple and ubiquitous sensors, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 158--175., 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. J. O. Laguna, A. G. Olaya, and D. Borrajo, A dynamic sliding window approach for activity recognition. In User Modeling, Adaption and Personalization, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 219--230, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. D. J. Cook, N. C. Krishnan, and P. Rashidi, Activity discovery and activity recognition: A new partnership. Cybernetics, IEEE Transactions on, 43(3), pp. 820--828, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. J. Wan, M. J. O'Grady, and G. M. O'Hare, Dynamic sensor event segmentation for real-time activity recognition in a smart home context. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, pp. 1--15, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. X. Hong, and C. D. Nugent, Partitioning time series sensor data for activity recognition. In Information Technology and Applications in Biomedicine, ITAB 2009, 9th International Conference, IEEE, pp. 1--4, Nov. 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. M. S. Ryoo, Human activity prediction: Early recognition of ongoing activities from streaming videos. In Computer Vision (ICCV), 2011 IEEE International Conference, IEEE, pp. 1036--1043, Nov. 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. K. Li, J. Hu, and Y. Fu, Modeling complex temporary composition of actionlets for activity prediction. In Computer Vision-ECCV 2012, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 286--299, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. M. S. Ryoo, T. J. Fuchs, L. Xia, J. K. Aggarwal, and L. Matthies, Robot-Centric Activity Prediction from First-Person Videos: What Will They Do To Me? HRI' 15, PortLand, USA, Mar. 2015, Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. E. M. Tapia, S. S. Intille, and K. Larson, Activity recognition in the home setting using simple and ubiquitous sensors, in Proceedings of PERVASIVE 2004, vol. LNCS 3001, A. Ferscha and F. Mattern, Eds. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, pp. 158--175, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. X. Zhu, C. Vondrick, D. Ramanan, and C. Fowlkes, Do We Need More Training Data or Better Models for Object Detection?, In BMVC, Vol. 3, p. 5, Sep. 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. K. S. Gayathri, S. Elias, and S. Shivashankar, An Ontology and Pattern Clustering Approach for Activity Recognition in Smart Environments. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Soft Computing for Problem Solving, Springer India, pp. 833--843, Jan. 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Automatic Sensor Data Stream Segmentation for Real-time Activity Prediction in Smart Spaces

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          IoT-Sys '15: Proceedings of the 2015 Workshop on IoT challenges in Mobile and Industrial Systems
          May 2015
          64 pages
          ISBN:9781450335027
          DOI:10.1145/2753476

          Copyright © 2015 ACM

          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]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 18 May 2015

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          IoT-Sys '15 Paper Acceptance Rate9of18submissions,50%Overall Acceptance Rate9of18submissions,50%

          Upcoming Conference

          MOBISYS '24

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader