Advertisement

Learning and Recognizing Routines and Activities in SOFiA

  • Berardina De CarolisEmail author
  • Stefano Ferilli
  • Giulio Mallardi
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8850)

Abstract

In order to promote an effective and personalized interaction, smart environments should be endowed with the capability of understanding what the user is doing. To this aim we developed a system called WoMan that, using a process mining approach, is able to incrementally learn user’s activities and daily routines as workflow models. In order to test its efficacy in a real-world setting, we set up a smart office environment, SOFiA, equipped with a sensor network based on Arduino. Then we collected an annotated dataset of 45 days and from this dataset we learned the workflow models of the user daily routines and of the activities performed in the office. Then we performed some experiments that show how our approach perform in learning and recognizing activities and routines. In particular, we achieve in average the accuracy of 82% for tasks and the accuracy of 98% for the transitions among tasks. Moreover we test the real-time performance of the approach with sensor data coming from the SOFiA sensors and the system started to make a correct prediction since the fourth execution in 82% of the cases.

Keywords

Sensor Network Activity Recognition Daily Routine Ambient Intelligence Human Activity Recognition 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ramos, C., Marreiros, G., Santos, R., Freitas, F.C.: Smart Offices and Intelligent Decision Rooms. In: Handbook Ambient Intelligence Smart Environ VII, pp. 851–880. Springer (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    http://www.arduino.cc/ (last consulted on the August 19, 2014)
  3. 3.
    AnonymizedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Marsa-Maestre, I., de la Hoz, E., Alarcos, B., Velasco, J.R.: A hierarchical, agent-based approach to security in smart offices. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (ICUC-2006) (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fiore, L., Fehr, D., Bodor, R., Drenner, A., Somasundaram, G., Papanikolopoulos, N.: Multi-Camera Human Activity Monitoring. Journal of Intelligent and Robotic Systems 52(1), 5–43 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Parkka, J., Ermes, M., Korpipaa, P., Mantyjarvi, J., Peltola, J., Korhonen, I.: Activity classification using realistic data from wearable sensors. IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine 10(1), 119–128 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Patterson, D.J., Fox, D., Kautz, H., Philipose, M.: Fine-grained activity recognition by aggregating abstract object usage. In: Proc. of IEEE International Symposium on Wearable Computers, pp. 44–51 (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gu, T., Wang, L., Wu, Z., Tao, X., Lu, J.: A Pattern Mining Approach to Sensor-Based Human Activity Recognition. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 23(9), 1359–1372 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    van Kasteren, T.L.M., Englebienne, G., Kröse, B.: Human Activity Recognition from Wireless Sensor Network Data: Benchmark and Software. In: Activity Recognition in Pervasive Intelligent Environments, Atlantis Ambient and Pervasive Intelligence series. Atlantis Press (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kim, E., Helal, S., Cook, D.: Human activity recognition and pattern discovery. IEEE Pervasive Computing 9, 48–53 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hu, D.H., Yang, Q.: Cigar: Concurrent and interleaving goal and activity recognition. In: 23rd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI’08), pp. 1363–1368 (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chen, L., Nugent, C., Mulvenna, M., Finlay, D., Hong, X.: A Logical Framework for Behaviour Reasoning and Assistance in a Smart Home. Int’l J. Assistive Robotics and Mechatronics 9(4), 20–34 (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Riboni, D., Bettini, C.: OWL 2 modeling and reasoning with complex human activities. Pervasive and Mobile Computing 7(3), 379–395 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Helaoui, R., Riboni, D., Stuckenschmidt, H.: A probabilistic ontological framework for the recognition of multilevel human activities. In: International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp2013), pp. 345–354 (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Aztiria, A., Augusto, J.C., Basagoiti, R., Izaguirre, A., Cook, D.J.: Learning Frequent Behaviors of the Users in Intelligent Environments. IEEE T. Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems 43(6), 1265–1278 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Weijters, A.J.M.M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Rediscovering workflow models from event-based data using little thumb. Integr. Comput.-Aided Eng. 10(2), 151–162 (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Serral, E., Valderas, P., Pelechano, V.: Supporting runtime system evolution to adapt to user behaviour. In: Pernici, B. (ed.) CAiSE 2010. LNCS, vol. 6051, pp. 378–392. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    AnonymizedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    AnonymizedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cook, D.J., Das, S.K.: How smart are our environments? an updated look at the state of the art. Pervasive Mobile Computing 3(2), 53–73 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    van der Aalst, W., Weijters, T., Maruster, L.: Workflow Mining: Discovering Process Models from Event Logs. IEEE Trans. on Knowl. and Data Eng. 16(9), 1128–1142 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Berardina De Carolis
    • 1
    Email author
  • Stefano Ferilli
    • 1
  • Giulio Mallardi
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di InformaticaUniversità di BariBariItaly

Personalised recommendations