Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content

Comparison of Classifiers for Human Activity Recognition

  • Conference paper
Nature Inspired Problem-Solving Methods in Knowledge Engineering (IWINAC 2007)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 4528))

  • 1233 Accesses

Abstract

The human activity recognition in video sequences is a field where many types of classifiers have been used as well as a wide range of input features that feed these classifiers. This work has a double goal. First of all, we extracted the most relevant features for the activity recognition by only utilizing motion features provided by a simple tracker based on the 2D centroid coordinates and the height and width of each person’s blob. Second, we present a performance comparison among seven different classifiers (two Hidden Markov Models (HMM), a J.48 tree, two Bayesian classifiers, a classifier based on rules and a Neuro-Fuzzy system). The video sequences under study present four human activities (inactive, active, walking and running) that have been manual labeled previously. The results show that the classifiers reveal different performance according to the number of features employed and the set of classes to sort. Moreover, the basic motion features are not enough to have a complete description of the problem and obtain a good classification.

Funded by CICYT TEC2005-07186, CAM 15 MADRINET S- 0505/TIC/0255, FOMENTO SINPROB.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Nascimento, J.C., Figueiredo, M.A.T., Marques, J.S.: Segmentation and Classification of Human Activities. In: HAREM 2005: International Workshop on Human Activity Recognition and Modelling, Oxford, UK (September 2005)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ribeiro, P.C., Santos-Victor, J.: Human Activity Recognition from Video: modeling, feature, selection and classification arquitecture. In: HAREM 2005: International Workshop on Human Activity Recognition and Modelling, Oxford, UK (September 2005)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brännström, S.: Extraction, Evaluation and Selection of Motion Features for Human Activity Recognition Purposes. Master’s Thesis in Computer Science at the School of Engineering Physics Royal Institute of Technology (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Masoud, O., Papanikolopoulos, N.: A Method For Human Action Recognition. Department of Computer Science and Engineering University of Minnesota (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Zou, X., Bhanu, B.: Human Activity Classification Based on Gait Energy Image and Coevolutionary Genetic Programming. In: 18th International Conference on Pattern Recognition, ICPR 2006, 20-24 Aug. 2006, vol. 3, pp. 556–559 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ahmad, M., Lee, S.-W.: HMM-based Human Action Recognition Using Multiview Image Sequences. In: 18th International Conference on Pattern Recognition, ICPR 2006, 20-24 Aug. 2006, vol. 1, pp. 263–266 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Leo, M., D’Orazio, T., Gnoni, I., Spagnolo, P., Distante, A.: Complex Human Activity Recognition for Monitoring Wide Outdoor Environments. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Pattern Recognition, ICPR 2004, 23-26 Aug. 2004, vol. 4, pp. 913–916 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Rybski, P.E., Veloso, M.M.: Human Activity Recognition from Video: modeling, feature selection and classification architecture. In: HAREM 2005 - International Workshop on Human Activity Recognition and Modeling, Oxford, UK (September 2005)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Feng, Z., Cham, T.-J.: Video-based Human Action Classi.cation with Ambiguous Correspondences. In: Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 20-26 June 2005, vol. 3, pp. 82–82. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  10. CAVIAR PROJECT, http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/rbf/CAVIAR

  11. Santoro, D.M., Hruschska Jr., E.R., do Carmo Nicoletti, M.: Selecting feature subsets for inducing classifiers using a committee of heterogeneous methods. In: 2005 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 10-12 Oct. 2005, vol. 1, pp. 375–380 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kohavi, R., Sommerfield, D.: Feature Subset Selection Using the Wrapper Method: Overfitting and Dynamic Search Space Topology. In: First International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, KDD-95 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  13. WEKA, http://www.cs.waikato.ac.nz/ml/weka/

  14. Pérez, Ó., Piccardi, M., García, J., Patricio, M.A., Molina, J.M.: Comparison between Genetic Algorithms and the Baum-Welch Algorithm in Learning HMMs for Human Activity Classification. In: Proceedings of EvoIASP2007: Ninth European Workshop on Evolutionary Computation in Image Analysis and Signal Processing, Valencia, Spain, 11-13 April (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  15. NEFCLASS, http://fuzzy.cs.uni-magdeburg.de/nefclass/

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

José Mira José R. Álvarez

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Pérez, Ó., Piccardi, M., García, J., Molina, J.M. (2007). Comparison of Classifiers for Human Activity Recognition. In: Mira, J., Álvarez, J.R. (eds) Nature Inspired Problem-Solving Methods in Knowledge Engineering. IWINAC 2007. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4528. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-73055-2_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-73055-2_21

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-73054-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-73055-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics