A Smoothed Naive Bayes-Based Classifier for Activity Recognition

Abstract A number of classifiers have been proposed by the researchers for activity recognition using binary and ubiquitous sensors. Many researchers have shown that the hidden Markov model (HMM) and the conditional random field (CRF)-based activity classifiers work well to classify activities in comparison with the widely used naüve Bayes-based activity classifier. However, it would not be an exact verdict if a naüve Bayes-based activity classifier is properly smoothed. Parameter estimation plays the central role in the performance of a naüve Bayes activity classifier. Data sparsity puts substantial challenges in parameter estimation because the sizes of the real-life activity datasets are relatively small. The distribution of the sensors may not be even among the activity classes. Additionally, some of the sensors would appear during testing but would not appear while training. This is called zero-frequency problems which assign zero probability of a sensor for a given activity. To prevent such estimation problems, we propose two smoothing techniques for adjusting the maximum likelihood to produce more precise probability of a sensor given an activity. We performed three experiments using three real-life activity datasets. It is observed that our proposed mechanism yields significant improvement in the accuracy of activity classification in comparison with its existing counterparts. We achieved the class accuracy ranging between 63% and 83%.

[1]  James A. Landay,et al.  The Mobile Sensing Platform: An Embedded Activity Recognition System , 2008, IEEE Pervasive Computing.

[2]  Martha E. Pollack,et al.  An 'Object-Use Fingerprint': The Use of Electronic Sensors for Human Identification , 2007, UbiComp.

[3]  David J. C. MacKay,et al.  A hierarchical Dirichlet language model , 1995, Natural Language Engineering.

[4]  Henry A. Kautz,et al.  Fine-grained activity recognition by aggregating abstract object usage , 2005, Ninth IEEE International Symposium on Wearable Computers (ISWC'05).

[5]  Kent Larson,et al.  Using a Live-In Laboratory for Ubiquitous Computing Research , 2006, Pervasive.

[6]  Petra Perner,et al.  Data Mining - Concepts and Techniques , 2002, Künstliche Intell..

[7]  Gilbert Cockton,et al.  CHI '03 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems , 2003, CHI 2003.

[8]  Paul Lukowicz,et al.  Activity Recognition of Assembly Tasks Using Body-Worn Microphones and Accelerometers , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[9]  Hermann Ney,et al.  On structuring probabilistic dependences in stochastic language modelling , 1994, Comput. Speech Lang..

[10]  Henry A. Kautz,et al.  Inferring High-Level Behavior from Low-Level Sensors , 2003, UbiComp.

[11]  Ling Bao,et al.  A context-aware experience sampling tool , 2003, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[12]  Kent Larson,et al.  Activity Recognition in the Home Using Simple and Ubiquitous Sensors , 2004, Pervasive.

[13]  Frederick Jelinek,et al.  Interpolated estimation of Markov source parameters from sparse data , 1980 .

[14]  Zoubin Ghahramani,et al.  Learning Dynamic Bayesian Networks , 1997, Summer School on Neural Networks.

[15]  Emmanuel Munguia Tapia,et al.  Toward Scalable Activity Recognition for Sensor Networks , 2006, LoCA.

[16]  Qiang Yang,et al.  CIGAR: Concurrent and Interleaving Goal and Activity Recognition , 2008 .

[17]  Johannes D. Krijnders,et al.  CASSANDRA: audio-video sensor fusion for aggression detection , 2007, 2007 IEEE Conference on Advanced Video and Signal Based Surveillance.

[18]  Paul M. B. Vitányi,et al.  The Google Similarity Distance , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[19]  Qiang Yang,et al.  Real world activity recognition with multiple goals , 2008, UbiComp.

[20]  S. Katz,et al.  Progress in development of the index of ADL. , 1970, The Gerontologist.

[21]  CHENGXIANG ZHAI,et al.  A study of smoothing methods for language models applied to information retrieval , 2004, TOIS.

[22]  Kent Larson,et al.  Tools for Studying Behavior and Technology in Natural Settings , 2003, UbiComp.

[23]  M. Csíkszentmihályi,et al.  Validity and Reliability of the Experience‐Sampling Method , 1987, The Journal of nervous and mental disease.

[24]  Gwenn Englebienne,et al.  Accurate activity recognition in a home setting , 2008, UbiComp.

[25]  Christopher D. Manning,et al.  Introduction to Information Retrieval , 2010, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[26]  Slava M. Katz,et al.  Estimation of probabilities from sparse data for the language model component of a speech recognizer , 1987, IEEE Trans. Acoust. Speech Signal Process..

[27]  Sunny Consolvo,et al.  Using the Experience Sampling Method to Evaluate Ubicomp Applications , 2003, IEEE Pervasive Comput..

[28]  Christopher G. Atkeson,et al.  Simultaneous Tracking and Activity Recognition (STAR) Using Many Anonymous, Binary Sensors , 2005, Pervasive.

[29]  I. Good THE POPULATION FREQUENCIES OF SPECIES AND THE ESTIMATION OF POPULATION PARAMETERS , 1953 .

[30]  Jennifer Healey,et al.  A Long-Term Evaluation of Sensing Modalities for Activity Recognition , 2007, UbiComp.

[31]  F ChenStanley,et al.  An Empirical Study of Smoothing Techniques for Language Modeling , 1996, ACL.

[32]  Marco Gori,et al.  Adaptive Processing of Sequences and Data Structures, International Summer School on Neural Networks, "E.R. Caianiello"-Tutorial Lectures , 1997 .