Cited by 431Context-Aware Activity Recognition SystemsHand Gesture Recognition SystemsMusic and Audio Processing

Activity Recognition of Assembly Tasks Using Body-Worn Microphones and Accelerometers

Open access
Ward, J.A., Lukowicz, P., Troster, G., Starner, T.E.·2006·IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence

Abstract

In order to provide relevant information to mobile users, such as workers engaging in the manual tasks of maintenance and assembly, a wearable computer requires information about the user's specific activities. This work focuses on the recognition of activities that are characterized by a hand motion and an accompanying sound. Suitable activities can be found in assembly and maintenance work. Here, we provide an initial exploration into the problem domain of continuous activity recognition using on-body sensing. We use a mock "wood workshop" assembly task to ground our investigation. We describe a method for the continuous recognition of activities (sawing, hammering, filing, drilling, grinding, sanding, opening a drawer, tightening a vise, and turning a screwdriver) using microphones and three-axis accelerometers mounted at two positions on the user's arms. Potentially "interesting" activities are segmented from continuous streams of data using an analysis of the sound intensity detected at the two different locations. Activity classification is then performed on these detected segments using linear discriminant analysis (LDA) on the sound channel and hidden Markov models (HMMs) on the acceleration data. Four different methods at classifier fusion are compared for improving these classifications. Using user-dependent training, we obtain continuous average recall and precision rates (for positive activities) of 78 percent and 74 percent, respectively. Using user-independent training (leave-one-out across five users), we obtain recall rates of 66 percent and precision rates of 63 percent. In isolation, these activities were recognized with accuracies of 98 percent, 87 percent, and 95 percent for the user-dependent, user-independent, and user-adapted cases, respectively.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tpami.2006.197

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Generative approaches such as naïve Bayes classifiers, Markov models and dynamic Bayes networks have yielded promising results for behavior modeling and offline activity recognition when a large amount of labeled data is available.

    “Generative approaches such as naïve Bayes classifiers, Markov models and dynamic Bayes networks have yielded promising results for behavior modeling and offline activity recognition when a large amount of labeled data is available [33–40].”

    From Forecasting occurrences of activities (2017) · cites this paper as [36]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ward, J. A., Lukowicz, P., Troster, G., & Starner, T. E.
Affiliations
  • ETH Zurich (CH)
  • University of Passau (DE)
  • Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
Published
2006-10
Volume
28
Issue
10
Pages
1553-1567
ISSN
  • 0162-8828 (ISSN-L)
  • 2160-9292
OpenAlex
W2166712377
Cited by
431
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 34 · 2015: 34 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 24
FWCI
25.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Context-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Hand Gesture Recognition Systems
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Music and Audio Processing
Keywords
activity recognition, assembly tasks, wearable computing, accelerometer, on-body sensing, hand movement, sound intensity, classifier combination, hidden Markov models, linear discriminant analysis, maintenance work, wood workshop
MeSH terms
Acceleration, Activities of Daily Living, Artificial Intelligence, Clothing, Humans, Ergonomics, Industry, Motor Activity, Occupations, Pattern Recognition, Automated, Sound Spectrography, Task Performance and Analysis, Transducers, Workplace, Monitoring, Ambulatory

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