Sensor-Activity Relevance in Human Activity Recognition with Wearable Motion Sensors and Mutual Information Criterion

Selecting a suitable sensor configuration is an important aspect of recognizing human activities with wearable motion sensors. This problem encompasses selecting the number and type of the sensors, configuring them on the human body, and identifying the most informative sensor axes. In earlier work, researchers have used customized sensor configurations and compared their activity recognition rates with those of others. However, the results of these comparisons are dependent on the feature sets and the classifiers employed. In this study, we propose a novel approach that utilizes the time-domain distributions of the raw sensor measurements. We determine the most informative sensor types (among accelerometers, gyroscopes, and magnetometers), sensor locations (among torso, arms, and legs), and measurement axes (among three perpendicular coordinate axes at each sensor) based on the mutual information criterion.

[1]  Billur Barshan,et al.  Human activity classification with miniature inertial and magnetic sensors , 2011, 2011 IEEE 19th Signal Processing and Communications Applications Conference (SIU).

[2]  Billur Barshan,et al.  Pedestrian dead reckoning employing simultaneous activity recognition cues , 2012 .

[3]  Wentian Li Mutual information functions versus correlation functions , 1990 .

[4]  Billur Barshan,et al.  Comparative study on classifying human activities with miniature inertial and magnetic sensors , 2010, Pattern Recognit..

[5]  Kenneth Meijer,et al.  Activity identification using body-mounted sensors—a review of classification techniques , 2009, Physiological measurement.

[6]  A. Enis Çetin,et al.  HMM Based Falling Person Detection Using Both Audio and Video , 2005, 2006 IEEE 14th Signal Processing and Communications Applications.

[7]  Guang-Zhong Yang,et al.  Sensor Positioning for Activity Recognition Using Wearable Accelerometers , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Circuits and Systems.

[8]  Diane J. Cook,et al.  Human Activity Recognition and Pattern Discovery , 2010, IEEE Pervasive Computing.

[9]  David Howard,et al.  A Comparison of Feature Extraction Methods for the Classification of Dynamic Activities From Accelerometer Data , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[10]  Billur Barshan,et al.  Human Activity Recognition Using Inertial/Magnetic Sensor Units , 2010, HBU.

[11]  Thomas M. Cover,et al.  Elements of Information Theory , 2005 .

[12]  Rama Chellappa,et al.  Machine Recognition of Human Activities: A Survey , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology.

[13]  Tony Hope,et al.  Ethical issues in the use of fall detectors , 2011, Ageing and Society.

[14]  Gregory J. Pottie,et al.  Feature selection based on mutual information for human activity recognition , 2012, 2012 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP).