SenseGen: A deep learning architecture for synthetic sensor data generation
Open accessAbstract
Our ability to synthesize sensory data that preserves specific statistical properties of the real data has had tremendous implications on data privacy and big data analytics. The synthetic data can be used as a substitute for selective real data segments - that are sensitive to the user - thus protecting privacy and resulting in improved analytics. However, increasingly adversarial roles taken by data recipients such as mobile apps, or other cloud-based analytics services, mandate that the synthetic data, in addition to preserving statistical properties, should also be “difficult” to distinguish from the real data. Typically, visual inspection has been used as a test to distinguish between datasets. But more recently, sophisticated classifier models (discriminators), corresponding to a set of events, have also been employed to distinguish between synthesized and real data. The model operates on both datasets and the respective event outputs are compared for consistency. Prior work on data synthesis have often focussed on classifiers that are built for features explicitly preserved by the synthetic data. This suggests that an adversary can build classifiers that can exploit a potentially disjoint set of features for differentiating between the two datasets. In this paper, we take a step towards generating sensory data that can pass a deep learning based discriminator model test, and make two specific contributions: first, we present a deep learning based architecture for synthesizing sensory data. This architecture comprises of a generator model, which is a stack of multiple Long-Short-Term-Memory (LSTM) networks and a Mixture Density Network (MDN); second, we use another LSTM network based discriminator model for distinguishing between the true and the synthesized data. Using a dataset of accelerometer traces, collected using smartphones of users doing their daily activities, we show that the deep learning based discriminator model can only distinguish between the real and synthesized traces with an accuracy in the neighborhood of 50%.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Deep learning methods are used to augment datasets to improve performance.
“Deep learning methods are also used to augment the datasets to improve performance [238,263,264].”
From Deep Learning in Human Activity Recognition with Wearable Sensors: A Review on Advances (2022) · cites this paper as [264]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 19 · Cited by 153
- Authors
- Alzantot, M., Chakraborty, S., & Srivastava, M.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- IBM Research - Thomas J. Watson Research Center (US)
- Venue
- 2017 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PerCom Workshops)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2017-03
- Pages
- 188-193
- OpenAlex
- W2584755547
- Cited by
- 153
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 3
- FWCI
- 5.74
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PerCom Workshops) (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- Army Research Laboratory
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Generative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
- Keywords
- data privacy, mixture density networks, generative adversarial networks, data synthesis
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review