Technical annex of activity recognition – EvAAL Competition Important: this version of the annex will be refined with the feedback of the competitors. Refined versions will be timely distributed to the competitors by means of the This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it @ This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it . This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it . This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it mailing list. TechnologiesEach team should implement an activity recognition system (ARS) to cover the area of the Living Lab (indoors). There is no limitation on the number of devices that can be used. The ARS can be based on a variety of sensors and technologies, including: accelerometers, gyroscopes, magnetometers, pressure sensors, microphones, sensor networks, mobile phones, etc. The proposed systems may also include combinations of different technologies. Other technologies can be accepted provided they are compatible with the constraints of the hosting living lab. To this purpose competitors wishing to check such compatibility may inquire with the organizers by e-mail ( This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it @ This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it . This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it . This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it ). The teams should consider possible restrictions related to the availability of power plugs, cable displacement, attachment of devices to walls/furniture in the Living Lab, etc. The requirements of the proposed ARS should be communicated at an early stage in order to make the necessary on-site arrangements. The Technical Program Committee (TPC) may exclude an ARS if their deployment is incompatible with the living lab constraints. Activities that the competitors must recognizeWe will classify the activities in the next categories:
Evaluation criteriaIn order to evaluate the competing ARS, the TPC will apply the evaluation criteria listed in this document. For each criterion, a numerical score will be awarded. Where possible the score will be measured by direct observation or technical measurement. Whether this is not possible, the score will be determined by the Evaluation Committee (EC). The EC will be composed of some volunteer members of the Technical Program Committee TPC, and will be present during the competition at the Living Lab. The evaluation criteria is: 1. Performance –F-measure (2*precision*recall/precision+recall) will be used to measure and compare the performance of the ARS. 2. User acceptance– Captures how much invasive the ARS is in the user’s daily life and thereby the impact perceived by the user; this parameter will be evaluated by the EC. 3. Recognition delay– Elapsed time between the instant in which the user begins an activity and the time in which the system recognizes it. 4. Installation complexity– A measure of the effort required to install the ARS in a flat/user, measured by the evaluation committee as a function of the person-minutes of work needed to complete the installation (The person-minutes of the first installer will be fully included; the person-minutes of any other installer will be divided by 2). 5. Interoperability with AAL systems– Metrics used are: use of open source solutions, use of standards, availability of libraries for development, integration with standard protocols. Considerations for wearable devices: The recognition system will be used uniquely to that purpose (if the system is a mobile phone, it would not be used to make calls or other tasks). In any case, none of the wearable devices or devices deployed in the house will be removed/replaced/moved during all the experiments. The following table presents the overall scoring criteria. Each criterion has a maximum of 10 points. The weightings shown will be applied to the individual scores in order to determine the overall score:
* Some more clarification about the “user acceptance” criteria: The evaluators will judge based mainly on the following criteria, in no particular order of significance:
Examples of questions to which evaluators will answer about a wearable device are:
Benchmark TestingThe score for measurable criteria for each competing system will be evaluated by means of benchmark tests (prepared by the organizing committee). For this purpose each team will be allocated a precise time slot at the living lab, during which the benchmark tests will be carried out. The benchmark consists of a set of tests, each of which will contribute to the scores in the assessment of the system. The EC will ensure that the benchmark tests are applied correctly to each system. The evaluation process will also assign scores to the system for the criteria that cannot be assessed directly through benchmark testing. When both benchmark testing (criteria 1, 3 and 4) and the evaluation by the EC (criteria 2 and 5) have been completed, the overall score for each system will be calculated using the weightings shown above. All final scores will be disclosed at the end of the competition, and the systems ranked according to this final score. The time slot for benchmark testing is divided in three parts. In the first part, the competing team will deploy and configure their system in the living lab and on will equip and instruct the actor playing the role of a typical user. This part should last no more than Xminutes. X parameter will be defined in the next revisions of this document. In the second part the benchmark will be applied. During this phase the competitors will have the opportunity to perform only short reconfigurations of their systems (anyway removal, replacement, movement of fixed devices or addition of new devices will not be allowed). In any case, this part should be concluded in Y minutes (strict deadline). Y parameter will be defined in the next revisions of this document. In the last part the teams will remove the system from the living lab and the actor in order to enable the installation of the next competing system (also this part will have strict deadlines). Competing teams who will fail to meet the deadlines in parts 1 and 3 will be given the minimum score for each criterion related to the benchmark test. Furthermore, systems should be kept active and working during all of the second part. If benchmark testing in the second part is not completed, the system will be awarded a minimum score for all the missing tests. During the second part, the ARS will be evaluated. An actor (an EC member), will perform a predefined physical activity trip across the smart home. Audio signals will be used to synchronize the actor movements in each performance in order to get the same ground truth for all the participants. The path followed by the actor and the activities performed will be the same for each test, and it will not be disclosed to competitors before the application of the benchmarks. Notice the smart home has an indoor garden and the actor could also perform activities there. The environment will be made as much as possible similar to a house. This means that, if possible, there will typical appliances on, neighbour’s WiFi AP on, cellular phones on, etc. The kind of environmental noise will be defined during the induction phase of the competition. In order to evaluate the performance of the competing systems, the organizers will compare the output of the systems with the ground truth: a timestamp labelled data. Details will be made public to the competitors as soon as the decisions in merit will be taken by the TPC. Environment The CIAmI Living Lab is an approximately 90 m2 infrastructure that simulates the real environment of a citizen´s home combined with the existence of Information and Communications Technologies (ICT) massively distributed across the physical space, but as much invisible as possible to the people living in it.
Figure 2 - CIAmI Living Lab location
Figure 3 – Restricted area to the EvAAL Competition
Figure 4 - Removable floor and ceiling modules at CIAmI Living Lab
Figure 5 - Indoor and outdoor views of the CIAmI Living Lab |