Advertisement

Abstract

Pervasive computing envisions implicit interaction between people and their intelligent environments instead of between individuals and their devices, inevitably leading to groups of individuals interacting with the same intelligent environment. These environments must be aware of user contexts and activities, as well as the contexts and activities of groups of users. Here an application for in-network group activity recognition using only mobile devices and their sensors is presented. Different data abstraction levels for recognition were investigated in terms of recognition rates, power consumption and wireless communication volumes for the devices involved. The results indicate that using locally extracted features for global, multi-user activity recognition is advantageous (10% reduction in energy consumption, theoretically no loss in recognition rates). Using locally classified single-user activities incurred a 47% loss in recognition capabilities, making it unattractive. Local clustering of sensor data indicates potential for group activity recognition with room for improvement (40% reduction in energy consumed, though 20% loss of recognition abilities).

Keywords

group activity recognition context recognition distributed systems multi-user wearable 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bao, L., Intille, S.S.: Activity Recognition from User-Annotated Acceleration Data. In: Ferscha, A., Mattern, F. (eds.) PERVASIVE 2004. LNCS, vol. 3001, pp. 1–17. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beigl, M., Gellersen, H.-W., Schmidt, A.: Mediacups: experience with design and use of computer-augmented everyday artefacts. Comput. Netw. 35, 401–409 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Berchtold, M., Budde, M., Gordon, D., Schmidtke, H., Beigl, M.: ActiServ: Activity recognition service for mobile phones. In: ISWC 2010: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Symposium on Wearable Computers, pp. 83–90. IEEE Computer Society, Seoul (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Blanke, U., Schiele, B.: Daily Routine Recognition through Activity Spotting. In: Choudhury, T., Quigley, A., Strang, T., Suginuma, K. (eds.) LoCA 2009. LNCS, vol. 5561, pp. 192–206. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chang, M.-C., Krahnstoever, N., Lim, S., Yu, T.: Group level activity recognition in crowded environments across multiple cameras. In: IEEE Conference on Advanced Video and Signal Based Surveillance, pp. 56–63 (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dong, W., Lepri, B., Cappelletti, A., Pentland, A.S., Pianesi, F., Zancanaro, M.: Using the influence model to recognize functional roles in meetings. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces, ICMI 2007, pp. 271–278. ACM, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dunkels, A., Grönvall, B., Voigt, T.: Contiki - a lightweight and flexible operating system for tiny networked sensors. In: Proceedings of the First IEEE Workshop on Embedded Networked Sensors (Emnets-I), Tampa, Florida, USA (November 2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gordon, D., Hanne, J.-H., Berchtold, M., Miyaki, T., Beigl, M.: An Experiment in Hierarchical Recognition of Group Activities Using Wearable Sensors. In: Beigl, M., Christiansen, H., Roth-Berghofer, T.R., Kofod-Petersen, A., Coventry, K.R., Schmidtke, H.R. (eds.) CONTEXT 2011. LNCS, vol. 6967, pp. 104–107. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gu, T., Wu, Z., Wang, L., Tao, X., Lu, J.: Mining emerging patterns for recognizing activities of multiple users in pervasive computing. In: 6th Annual International Mobile and Ubiquitous Systems: Networking Services, MobiQuitous 2009, pp. 1–10 (July 2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hall, M., Frank, E., Holmes, G., Pfahringer, B., Reutemann, P., Witten, I.H.: The weka data mining software: an update. SIGKDD Explor. Newsl. 11, 10–18 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hsu, J.Y.-J., Lian, C.-C., Jih, W.-R.: Probabilistic models for concurrent chatting activity recognition. ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol. 2, 4:1–4:20 (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sigg, S., Gordon, D., von Zengen, G., Beigl, M., Haseloff, S., David, K.: Investigation of context prediction accuracy for different context abstraction levels. In: IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stäger, M., Lukowicz, P., Tröster, G.: Power and accuracy trade-offs in sound-based context recognition systems. Pervasive and Mobile Computing 3, 300–327 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Want, R., Hopper, A., Falcão, V., Gibbons, J.: The active badge location system. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. 10, 91–102 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wirz, M., Roggen, D., Tröster, G.: Decentralized detection of group formations from wearable acceleration sensors. In: Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on Computational Science and Engineering, vol. 4, pp. 952–959. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wirz, M., Roggen, D., Tröster, G.: A methodology towards the detection of collective behavior patterns by means of body-worn sensors. In: Workshop at the 8th International Conference on Pervasive Computing (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© ICST Institute for Computer Science, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dawud Gordon
    • 1
  • Jan-Hendrik Hanne
    • 2
  • Martin Berchtold
    • 2
  • Takashi Miyaki
    • 1
  • Michael Beigl
    • 1
  1. 1.Karlsruhe Institute of TechnologyKarlsruheGermany
  2. 2.Technische Universität BraunschweigBraunschweigGermany

Personalised recommendations