Spatial recognition of activities for cognitive assistance: realistic scenarios using clinical data from Alzheimer’s patients

  • Kevin BouchardEmail author
  • Bruno Bouchard
  • Abdenour Bouzouane
Original Research


The evolution of consumer electronics, telecommunications and computing has empowered ambient intelligence into an emerging field of research bringing new possible solutions to many problems of human life. One of them is the technological assistance of elders who are suffering from a cognitive deficit with the execution of their everyday life activities inside what is called a smart home. To enable this technology, the first challenge to overcome is the recognition of the resident’s activities of daily living (ADLs). This problem consists of inferring the minimal set of possible ongoing ADLs using templates (plans) of activities defined in a library. To successfully achieve that goal, we must exploit constraints of different natures (logical, temporal, etc.) in order to reject a maximal number of hypotheses. However, only a minority of works exploited the elementary spatial aspects related to objects and to their relations in the smart environment. In this paper, we propose a novel recognition model exploiting the fundamental qualitative spatial reasoning approach of Egenhofer to discriminate implausible ongoing activities. Furthermore, the model is validated through extensive testing of realistic scenarios based on clinical trials conducted at our laboratory with both normal and impaired subjects.


Spatial reasoning Activity recognition Smart home Alzheimer disease 



The authors would like to thank the Centre de santé et services sociaux (CSSS) of La Baie, the Maison Le Phare of Jonquière and our regional Alzheimer Society for helping us recruiting the participants. Finally, special thanks to our neuropsychologist partner and her graduate students who indirectly worked on this project by supervising the clinical trials with patients.


  1. Allen JF, Hayes PJ (1985) A common-sense theory of time. In: Proceedings of the 9th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence—vol. 1. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc, Los Angeles, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  2. Arnold BH (2011) Intuitive concepts in elementary topology. Dover Publications, MineolaGoogle Scholar
  3. Augusto JC, Nugent CD (2006) Smart homes can be smarter. In: Designing smart homes: role of artificial intelligence. Berlin, Springer-Verlag, pp 1–15Google Scholar
  4. Augusto JC, Liu J, McCullagh P, Wang H (2008) Management of uncertainty and spatio-temporal aspects for monitoring and diagnosis in a Smart Home. Int J Comput Intell Syst 1(4):361–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bouchard B, Giroux S, Bouzouane A (2007) A keyhole plan recognition model for Alzheimer’s patients: first results. J Appl Artif Intell 21(7):623–658. doi: 10.1080/08839510701492579 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bouchard K, Bouchard B, Bouzouane A (2011a) A new qualitative spatial recognition model based on Egenhofer topological approach using C4.5 algorithm: experiment and results. In: International conference on ambient systems, networks and technologies. Niagara Falls, Canada ElsevierGoogle Scholar
  7. Bouchard K, Bouchard B, Bouzouane A (2011b) Qualitative spatial activity recognition using a complete platform based on passive RFID tags: experimentations and results. In: 9th International Conference On Smart homes and health Telematics, edited by Bessam Abdulrazak, Sylvain Giroux, Bruno Bouchard, Hélène Pigot and Mounir Mokhtari, Montreal, Springer BerlinGoogle Scholar
  8. Buettner M, Richa P, Matthai P, David W (2009) Recognizing daily activities with RFID-based sensors. In: Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Ubiquitous computing. Orlando, Florida, USA, ACMGoogle Scholar
  9. Cohn AG, Bennett B, Gooday J, Gotts NM (1997) Qualitative spatial representation and reasoning with the region connection Calculus. Geoinformatica 1(3):275–316. doi: 10.1023/a:1009712514511 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Desolneux A, Lionel M, Jean-Michel M (2004) Gestalt theory and computer vision seeing, thinking and knowing. In: Carsetti A (ed) Springer, Netherlands, pp 71–101Google Scholar
  11. Diamond J (2006) A report on Alzheimer disease and current research. Alzheimer Soc Can 1–26Google Scholar
  12. Egenhofer MJ, Franzosa RD (1991) Point-set topological spatial relations. Int J Geograph Inform Syst 5(2):161–174Google Scholar
  13. Gu T, Chen S, Tao X, Jian L (2010) An unsupervised approach to activity recognition and segmentation based on object-use fingerprints. Data Knowl Eng 69(6):533–544. doi: 10.1016/j.datak.2010.01.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hauschildt D, Kirchhof N (2011) Improving indoor position estimation by combining active TDOA ultrasound and passive thermal infrared localization. 94–99. doi: 10.1109/wpnc.2011.5961022
  15. Herskovits A (1982) Space and the preposition in English: regularities and irregularities in a complex domain, Stanford UniversityGoogle Scholar
  16. Hoey J, Poupart P, von Bertoldi A, Craig T, Boutilier C, Mihailidis A (2010) Automated handwashing assistance for persons with dementia using video and a partially observable Markov decision process. Comput Vis Image Underst 114(5):503–519. doi: 10.1016/j.cviu.2009.06.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hu DH, Yang Q (2008) CIGAR: concurrent and interleaving goal and activity recognition. In: Proceedings of the 23rd national conference on Artificial intelligence—vol. 3, AAAI Press, Chicago, IllinoisGoogle Scholar
  18. Jakkula VR, Cook DJ (2008) Enhancing smart home algorithms using temporal relations. In: Mihailidis A, Boger J, Kautz H, Normie L (eds) Technology and aging. IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp 3–10Google Scholar
  19. Kautz HA (1991) A formal theory of plan recognition and its implementation. In: Reasoning about plans. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc, 69–124Google Scholar
  20. Li C, Jiajie Lu, Chao Yin, Lizhuang Ma (2009) Qualitative spatial representation and reasoning in 3D space. In: Proceedings of the 2009 Second International Conference on intelligent computation technology and automation—vol. 01: IEEE computer societyGoogle Scholar
  21. Modayil J, Tongxin Bai, Kautz H (2008) Improving the recognition of interleaved activities. In: Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Ubiquitous computing. Seoul, Korea, ACMGoogle Scholar
  22. Morales A, Guido S (2006) Using temporal logic for spatial reasoning: spatial propositional neighborhood logic. In: Proceedings of the thirteenth international symposium on temporal representation and reasoning: IEEE computer societyGoogle Scholar
  23. Nguyen NT, Phung DQ, Venkatesh S, Bui H (2005) Learning and detecting activities from movement trajectories using the hierarchical hidden markov models. In: Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE computer society conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (CVPR’05)—vol. 2—vol. 02. IEEE computer societyGoogle Scholar
  24. Patterson DJ, Dieter F, Kautz H, Philipose M (2005) Fine-grained activity recognition by aggregating abstract object usage. In: Proceedings of the ninth IEEE international symposium on wearable computers: IEEE computer societyGoogle Scholar
  25. Riedel DE, Venkatesh S, Liu W (2005) Spatial activity recognition in a smart home environment using a chemotactic model. In: International conference on intelligent sensors networks and information processing, IEEE, Melbourne, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  26. Roy P, Bouchard B, Bouzouane A, Giroux S (2010) Challenging issues of ambient activity recognition for cognitive assistance. Ambient Intell Smart Environ, pp 1–25Google Scholar
  27. Schwartz MF, Segal M, Veramonti T, Ferraro M, Buxbaum LJ (2002) The naturalistic action test: a standardised assessment for everyday action impairment, vol 12. Psychology Press, HoveGoogle Scholar
  28. Skubic M, Perzanowski D, Blisard S, Schultz A, Adams W, Bugajska M, Brock D (2004) Spatial language for human-robot dialogs. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, New-YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Van Tassel M, Bouchard J, Bouchard B, Bouzouane A (2011) Guidelines for increasing prompt efficiency in smart homes according to the resident’s profile and task characteristics. In: Bessam A, Sylvain G, Bouchard B, Hélène P, Mokhtari M (eds), vol. 6719, ICOST, SpringerGoogle Scholar
  30. Weiss G (2000) Multiagent systems: MIT PressGoogle Scholar
  31. Wu D, Butz C (2005) On the complexity of probabilistic inference in singly connected bayesian networks. In: 10th international conference. On rough sets, fuzzy sets, data mining, and granular computing, Springer-Verlag, Regina, CanadaGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kevin Bouchard
    • 1
    Email author
  • Bruno Bouchard
    • 1
  • Abdenour Bouzouane
    • 1
  1. 1.LIARA LabUniversité du Québec à ChicoutimiChicoutimiCanada

Personalised recommendations