MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Challenging Issues of Ambient Activity Recognition for Cognitive Assistance

2011· book-chapter· en· W2480756099 on OpenAlexaff
Patrice Roy, Bruno Bouchard, Abdenour Bouzouane, Sylvain Giroux

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicContext-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à ChicoutimiUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmbient intelligenceActivities of daily livingActivity recognitionAssisted livingCognitionOrder (exchange)Computer scienceField (mathematics)Home automationHuman–computer interactionPsychologyBusinessArtificial intelligenceMedicineTelecommunicationsGerontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to provide adequate assistance to cognitively impaired people when they carry out their activities of daily living (ADLs) at home, new technologies based on the emerging concept of Ambient Intelligence (AmI) must be developed. The main application of the AmI concept is the development of Smart Homes, which can provide advanced assistance services to its occupant when he performs his ADLs. The main difficulty inherent to this kind of assistance services is to be able to identify the on-going inhabitant ADL from the observed basic actions and from the sensors events produced by these actions. This chapter will investigate in details the challenging issues that emerge from activity recognition in order to provide cognitive assistance in Smart Homes, by identifying gaps in the capabilities of current approaches. This will allow to raise numerous research issues and challenges that need to be addressed for understanding this research field and enabling ambient recognition systems for cognitive assistance to operate effectively.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.757
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in computational intelligence and robotics book seriesSame topicContext-Aware Activity Recognition SystemsFrench-language works237,207