Abstract

In this article, we study activity recognition in the context of sensor-rich environments. In these environments, many different constraints arise at various levels during the data generation process, such as the intrinsic characteristics of the sensing devices, their energy and computational constraints, and their collective (collaborative) dimension. These constraints have a fundamental impact on the final activity recognition models as the quality of the data, its availability, and its reliability, among other things, are not ensured during model deployment in real-world configurations. Current approaches for activity recognition rely on the activity recognition chain which defines several steps that the sensed data undergo: This is an inductive process that involves exploring a hypothesis space to find a theory able to explain the observations. For activity recognition to be effective and robust, this inductive process must consider the constraints at all levels and model them explicitly. Whether it is a bias related to sensor measurement, transmission protocol, sensor deployment topology, heterogeneity, dynamicity, or stochastic effects, it is essential to understand their substantial impact on the quality of the data and ultimately on activity recognition models. This study highlights the need to exhibit the different types of biases arising in real situations so that machine learning models, e.g., can adapt to the dynamicity of these environments, resist sensor failures, and follow the evolution of the sensors’ topology. We propose a metamodeling approach in which these biases are specified as hyperparameters that can control the structure of the activity recognition models. Via these hyperparameters, it becomes easier to optimize the inductive processes, reason about them, and incorporate additional knowledge. It also provides a principled strategy to adapt the models to the evolutions of the environment. We illustrate our approach on the SHL dataset, which features motion sensor data for a set of human activities collected in real conditions. The obtained results make a case for the proposed metamodeling approach; noticeably, the robustness gains achieved when the deployed models are confronted with the evolution of the initial sensing configurations. The trade-offs exhibited and the broader implications of the proposed approach are discussed with alternative techniques to encode and incorporate knowledge into activity recognition models.

Highlights

  • Activity recognition aims to provide accurate and opportune information based on people’s activities and behaviors [1]

  • Whether it is a bias related to sensor measurement, transmission protocol, sensor deployment topology, heterogeneity, dynamicity, or stochastic effects, it is essential to understand their substantial impact on the quality of the data and on activity recognition models

  • In order to illustrate the advantages of the dynamic selection of inductive biases, we present a use-case pertaining to the SHL dataset [18], one of the most recent and featured datasets in human activity recognition literature

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Activity recognition aims to provide accurate and opportune information based on people’s activities and behaviors [1]. The activity recognition chain [16] is a widely used machine learning-based inductive process in the literature that is used to model human activities (our phenomenon of interest). It is composed of five different steps: data acquisition, preprocessing, segmentation, feature extraction, and classification. A natural solution is to delay the selection of the inductive biases as late as possible and to maintain concurrent hypotheses which can cope rapidly with new situations This results in different implications operationally speaking, namely, maintaining a set of alternative inductive bias candidates (the domain) and exploring the space rapidly in order to elect the appropriate hypothesis (amount of supervision with learning examples). The exploration of the hypothesis space should be structured by leveraging a priori knowledge about the sensor deployments and the phenomenon itself

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call