skip to main content
10.1145/958432.958442acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesicmi-mlmiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Selective perception policies for guiding sensing and computation in multimodal systems: a comparative analysis

Published:05 November 2003Publication History

ABSTRACT

Intensive computations required for sensing and processing perceptual information can impose significant burdens on personal computer systems. We explore several policies for selective perception in SEER, a multimodal system for recognizing office activity that relies on a layered Hidden Markov Model representation. We review our efforts to employ expected-value-of-information (EVI) computations to limit sensing and analysis in a context-sensitive manner. We discuss an implementation of a one-step myopic EVI analysis and compare the results of using the myopic EVI with a heuristic sensing policy that makes observations at different frequencies. Both policies are then compared to a random perception policy, where sensors are selected at random. Finally, we discuss the sensitivity of ideal perceptual actions to preferences encoded in utility models about information value and the cost of sensing.

References

  1. M. Ben-Bassat. Myopic policies in sequential classification. IEEE Trans. Comput., 27:170--178, 1978.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. R. Bolles. Verification vision for programmable assembly. In Proc. IJCAI'77, pages 569--575, 1977.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. M. Brand and V. Kettnaker. Discovery and segmentation of activities in video. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 22(8), 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. M. Brand, N. Oliver, and A. Pentland. Coupled hidden markov models for complex action recognition. In Proc. of CVPR97, pages 994--999, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. H. Buxton and S. Gong. Advanced Visual Surveillance using Bayesian Networks. In International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 111--123, Cambridge, Massachusetts, June 1995.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. J. Feldman and R. Sproull. Decision theory and artificial intelligence ii: The hungry monkey. Cognitive Science, 1:158--192, 1977.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. J. Fernyhough, A. Cohn, and D. Hogg. Building qualitative event models automatically from visual input. In ICCV'98, pages 350--355, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. J. Forbes, T. Huang, K. Kanazawa, and S. Russell. The batmobile: Towards a bayesian automated taxi. In Proc. Fourteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI'95, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. A. Galata, N. Johnson, and D. Hogg. Learning variable length markov models of behaviour. International Journal on Computer Vision, IJCV, pages 398--413, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. J. Garvey. Perceptual strategies for purposive vision. Technical Report 117, SRI International, 1976.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. G. Gorry and G. Barnett. Experience with a model of sequential diagnosis. Computers and Biomedical Research, 1:490--507, 1968.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. D. Heckerman, E. Horvitz, and B. Middleton. A nonmyopic approximation for value of information. In Proc. Seventh Conf. on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, 1991. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. J. Hoey. Hierarchical unsupervised learning of facial expression categories. In Proc. ICCV Workshop on Detection and Recognition of Events in Video, Vancouver, Canada, July 2001.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. E. Horvitz, J. Breese, and M. Henrion. Decision theory in expert systems and artificial intelligence. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, Special Issue on Uncertain Reasoning, 2:247--302, 1988. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. E. Horvitz, A. Jacobs, and D. Hovel. Attention-sensitive alerting. In Proc. of Conf. on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, UAI'99, pages 305--313, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. R. Howard. Value of information lotteries. IEEE Trans. on Systems, Science and Cybernetics, SSC-3, 1:54--60, 1967.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. S. S. Intille and A. F. Bobick. A framework for recognizing multi-agent action from visual evidence. In AAAI/IAAI'99, pages 518--525, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Y. Ivanov and A. Bobick. Recognition of visual activities and interactions by stochastic parsing. IEEE Trans. on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, TPAMI, 22(8):852--872, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. S. Li, X. Zou, Y. Hu, Z. Zhang, S. Yan, X. Peng, L. Huang, and H. Zhang. Real-time multi-view face detection, tracking, pose estimation, alignment, and recognition, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. A. Madabhushi and J. Aggarwal. A bayesian approach to human activity recognition. In In Proc. of the 2nd International Workshop on Visual Surveillance, pages 25--30, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. N. Oliver, E. Horvitz, and A. Garg. Layered representations for human activity recognition. In Proc. of Int. Conf. on Multimodal Interfaces, pages 3--8, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. L. Rabiner and B. Huang. Fundamentals of Speech Recognition. 1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. L. R. Rabiner. A tutorial on hidden Markov models and selected applications in speech recognition. Proceed. of the IEEE, 77(2):257--286, Feb. 1989.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. R. D. Rimey. Control of selective perception using bayes nets and decision theory. Technical Report TR468, 1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. F. B. S. Hongeng and R. Nevatia. Representation and optimal recognition of human activities. In Proc. of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, CVPR'00, 2000.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. T. Starner and A. Pentland. Real-time american sign language recognition from video using hidden markov models. In Proceed. of SCV'95, pages 265--270, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. L. van der Gaag and M. Wessels. Selective evidence gathering for diagnostic belief networks. AISB Quarterly, (86):23--34, 1993.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. A. Wilson and A. Bobick. Recognition and interpretation of parametric gesture. In Proc. of International Conference on Computer Vision, ICCV'98, pages 329--336, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. H. Wu and A. Cameron. A bayesian decision theoretic approach for adaptive goal-directed sensing. ICCV, 90:563--567, 1990.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Selective perception policies for guiding sensing and computation in multimodal systems: a comparative analysis

    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
      ICMI '03: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Multimodal interfaces
      November 2003
      318 pages
      ISBN:1581136218
      DOI:10.1145/958432

      Copyright © 2003 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: 5 November 2003

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • Article

      Acceptance Rates

      ICMI '03 Paper Acceptance Rate45of130submissions,35%Overall Acceptance Rate453of1,080submissions,42%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader