Cargando…

Comparison of Different Sets of Features for Human Activity Recognition by Wearable Sensors

Human Activity Recognition (HAR) refers to an emerging area of interest for medical, military, and security applications. However, the identification of the features to be used for activity classification and recognition is still an open point. The aim of this study was to compare two different feat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rosati, Samanta, Balestra, Gabriella, Knaflitz, Marco
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6308535/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30501111
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s18124189
_version_ 1783383211909316608
author Rosati, Samanta
Balestra, Gabriella
Knaflitz, Marco
author_facet Rosati, Samanta
Balestra, Gabriella
Knaflitz, Marco
author_sort Rosati, Samanta
collection PubMed
description Human Activity Recognition (HAR) refers to an emerging area of interest for medical, military, and security applications. However, the identification of the features to be used for activity classification and recognition is still an open point. The aim of this study was to compare two different feature sets for HAR. Particularly, we compared a set including time, frequency, and time-frequency domain features widely used in literature (FeatSet_A) with a set of time-domain features derived by considering the physical meaning of the acquired signals (FeatSet_B). The comparison of the two sets were based on the performances obtained using four machine learning classifiers. Sixty-one healthy subjects were asked to perform seven different daily activities wearing a MIMU-based device. Each signal was segmented using a 5-s window and for each window, 222 and 221 variables were extracted for the FeatSet_A and FeatSet_B respectively. Each set was reduced using a Genetic Algorithm (GA) simultaneously performing feature selection and classifier optimization. Our results showed that Support Vector Machine achieved the highest performances using both sets (97.1% and 96.7% for FeatSet_A and FeatSet_B respectively). However, FeatSet_B allows to better understand alterations of the biomechanical behavior in more complex situations, such as when applied to pathological subjects.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6308535
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63085352019-01-04 Comparison of Different Sets of Features for Human Activity Recognition by Wearable Sensors Rosati, Samanta Balestra, Gabriella Knaflitz, Marco Sensors (Basel) Article Human Activity Recognition (HAR) refers to an emerging area of interest for medical, military, and security applications. However, the identification of the features to be used for activity classification and recognition is still an open point. The aim of this study was to compare two different feature sets for HAR. Particularly, we compared a set including time, frequency, and time-frequency domain features widely used in literature (FeatSet_A) with a set of time-domain features derived by considering the physical meaning of the acquired signals (FeatSet_B). The comparison of the two sets were based on the performances obtained using four machine learning classifiers. Sixty-one healthy subjects were asked to perform seven different daily activities wearing a MIMU-based device. Each signal was segmented using a 5-s window and for each window, 222 and 221 variables were extracted for the FeatSet_A and FeatSet_B respectively. Each set was reduced using a Genetic Algorithm (GA) simultaneously performing feature selection and classifier optimization. Our results showed that Support Vector Machine achieved the highest performances using both sets (97.1% and 96.7% for FeatSet_A and FeatSet_B respectively). However, FeatSet_B allows to better understand alterations of the biomechanical behavior in more complex situations, such as when applied to pathological subjects. MDPI 2018-11-29 /pmc/articles/PMC6308535/ /pubmed/30501111 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s18124189 Text en © 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Rosati, Samanta
Balestra, Gabriella
Knaflitz, Marco
Comparison of Different Sets of Features for Human Activity Recognition by Wearable Sensors
title Comparison of Different Sets of Features for Human Activity Recognition by Wearable Sensors
title_full Comparison of Different Sets of Features for Human Activity Recognition by Wearable Sensors
title_fullStr Comparison of Different Sets of Features for Human Activity Recognition by Wearable Sensors
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Different Sets of Features for Human Activity Recognition by Wearable Sensors
title_short Comparison of Different Sets of Features for Human Activity Recognition by Wearable Sensors
title_sort comparison of different sets of features for human activity recognition by wearable sensors
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6308535/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30501111
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s18124189
work_keys_str_mv AT rosatisamanta comparisonofdifferentsetsoffeaturesforhumanactivityrecognitionbywearablesensors
AT balestragabriella comparisonofdifferentsetsoffeaturesforhumanactivityrecognitionbywearablesensors
AT knaflitzmarco comparisonofdifferentsetsoffeaturesforhumanactivityrecognitionbywearablesensors