Comparison of fusion methods based on DST and DBN in human activity recognition
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
Ambient assistive living environments require sophisticated information fusion and reasoning techniques to accurately identify activities of a person under care. In this paper, we explain, compare and discuss the application of two powerful fusion methods, namely dynamic Bayesian networks (DBN) and Dempster-Shafer theory (DST), for human activity recognition. Both methods are described, the implementation of activity recognition based on these methods is explained, and model acquisition and composition are suggested. We also provide functional comparison of both methods as well as performance comparison based on the publicly available activity dataset. Our findings show that in performance and applicability, both DST and DBN are very similar; however, significant differences exist in the ways the models are obtained. DST being top-down and knowledge-based, differs significantly in qualitative terms, when compared with DBN, which is data-driven. These qualitative differences between DST and DBN should therefore dictate the selection of the appropriate model to use, given a particular activity recognition application.
- J. Biswas, K. Sim, W. Huang, et al. Sensor based microcontext for mild dementia assistance[C]//Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Pervasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments (PETRA). Samos, Greece, 2010: DOI 10.1145/1839294.1839318.
- E. Kim, S. Helal, D. Cook. Human activity recognition and pattern discovery[J]. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 2010, 9(1): 48–53. CrossRef
- D. Lymberopoulos, T. Teixeira, A. Savvides. Macroscopic human behavior interpretation using distributed imager and other sensors[J]. Proceedings of the IEEE, 2008, 96(10): 1657–1677. CrossRef
- K. P. Murphy. Dynamic Bayesian Networks: Representation, Inference and Learning[D]. Berkeley: University of California, 2002.
- G. Shafer. A Mathematical Theory of Evidence[M]. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1976.
- A. Tolstikov. Application-level Quality of Service and Information Quality Provisioning in Sensor Networks[D]. Singapore: National University of Singapore, 2010.
- X. Hong, C. Nugent, M. Mulvenna, et al. Evidential fusion of sensor data for activity recognition in smart homes[J]. Pervasive and Mobile Computing, 2009, 5(3): 236–252. CrossRef
- Z. Ghahramani. Learning dynamic bayesian networks[M]. Adaptive Processing of Sequences and Data Structures. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1997: 168–197.
- A. P. Dempster, N. M. Laird, D. B. Rubin. Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm[J]. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B, 1977, 39(1): 1–8.
- M. Perkowitz, M. Philipose, D. J. Patterson. Mining models of human activities from the web[C]//Proceedings of the 13th International World Wide Web Conference (www’ 04). New York: ACM Press, 2004: 573–582. CrossRef
- T. L. M. van Kasteren, A. K. Noulas, G. Englebienne, et al. Accurate activity recognition in a home setting[C]//Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (Ubicomp’ 08). New York: ACM Press, 2008: 1–8. CrossRef
- Comparison of fusion methods based on DST and DBN in human activity recognition
Journal of Control Theory and Applications
Volume 9, Issue 1 , pp 18-27
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- South China University of Technology and Academy of Mathematics and Systems Science, CAS
- Additional Links
- Dynamic Bayesian networks
- Dempster-Shafer theory
- Healthcare monitoring
- Ambient assisted living
- Activity recognition
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Networking Protocols Department, Institute for Infocomm Research, 1 Fusionopolis Way, #21-01, Singapore, 138632, Singapore
- 2. School of Computing and Mathematics, University of Ulster, Shore Road, Newtownabbey, BT37 0QB, UK