Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 76 references

Long-term Detection System for Six Kinds of Abnormal Behavior of the Elderly Living Alone

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that a simulator-trained smart-home system, using one standardized preprocessing pipeline for binary ambient sensors, can detect six abnormal behaviors of elderly people living alone, with sensitivities above 0.9 for the…

desk verdict A clear, honestly scoped simulation study whose headline numbers are weaker than the abstract suggests because of small event counts and a lenient interval-overlap metric. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.13153 v1 pith:TRCFCTM7 submitted 2024-11-20 cs.LG

Kai Tanaka , Mineichi Kudo , Keigo Kimura , Atsuyoshi Nakamura This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.LG
keywords anomalydetectionelderlylivingalonesmarthomesambientsensorsbehaviorsimulationfallswanderinghousebound
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper proposes a smart-home system that watches an elderly person living alone through unobtrusive ambient sensors and tries to flag six specific abnormal behaviors: becoming semi-bedridden, becoming housebound, forgetting to turn off appliances or faucets, wandering, falling while walking, and falling while standing. Because real long-term data with confirmed anomalies is scarce and expensive, the authors train and test the system entirely on data generated by a simulator whose parameters are meant to be fitted to a given floor plan, sensor layout, and resident. The central result is that, on nine years of simulated sensor data, the detectors for semi-bedridden, housebound, and forgetting reach sensitivity above 0.9 with fewer than one false alarm every 50 days, and the wandering and fall detectors are comparable to earlier published methods. If the simulator's anomaly models are faithful to reality, this would give a low-cost, privacy-preserving way to catch early signs of health decline in elderly people living alone.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the sensor-data simulator that generates synchronized sensor firings and ground-truth anomaly labels from resident activity statistics, walking trajectories, an autoregressive MMSE score, and hand-coded anomaly models. Around it sits a unified preprocessing step that turns raw binary sensor events into a one-second binary matrix, then into anomaly-specific features and label intervals whose granularity matches the anomaly's duration: one second for falls and wandering, two hours for forgetting, and one day for housebound and semi-bedridden. The classifiers are deliberately simple—statistical threshold tests on estimated daily sleep duration and going-out frequency for semi-bedridden and housebound, a decision tree on appliance-on duration and the maximum distance to other active sensors for forgetting, random forests on nonresponse duration for fall while walking, and dynamic naive Bayes and hidden Markov models with post-hoc denoising for fall while standing and wandering.

What would settle it

Run the proposed classifiers on a modest real-world dataset of several months of ambient-sensor data from consenting elderly residents with caregiver- or diary-confirmed episodes of housebound, forgetting, and falls. If the interval-overlap sensitivity drops below about 0.5, or the false alarm rate rises above one per day, the simulator-fidelity premise is falsified; alternatively, compare real fall sensor traces to the simulator's 30-second immobility signature and see whether the signature appears in a majority of real falls.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that a single set of binary ambient sensors—infrared motion, pressure, door, flow, and power sensors—can feed one standardized preprocessing pipeline whose outputs are then classified separately for six anomalies with very different time scales, and that this can be learned without any real sensor data. The authors model each anomaly inside the simulator: being semi-bedridden as added napping and reduced outings for about 30 days, being housebound as reduced going-out and phone use for about 14 days, forgetting as appliances left on until the resident returns, wandering as aimless walking whose frequency and duration grow as the simulated MMSE score declines, and falls as roughly 30 seconds of immobility. In nine years of simulated test data, the per-anomaly classifiers achieve sensitivity and interval-based false alarm rates of 1.0 and 0.0 for semi-bedridden, 1.0 and 0.004 per day for housebound, 1.0 and 0.01 for forgetting, 1.0 and 0.017 with HMM and denoising for wandering, 0.75 and 0.02 for fall while walking, and 0.92 and 0.0 for fall while standing. The authors explicitly frame the result as promising because it avoids collecting rare, ethically difficult real anomalies, while acknowledging that transfer to real homes still depends on simulator realism.

Load-bearing premise

The system's training and test labels all come from the simulator's hand-written anomaly models; if real elderly people's abnormal behavior produces different sensor patterns—for example, a real fall with movement after impact, or housebound episodes with different going-out statistics—the reported sensitivities and false alarm rates will not carry over to real homes.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the simulated results transfer, a single privacy-preserving sensor set could monitor slow health decline (housebound, semi-bedridden) and urgent events (falls, forgetting) at the same time, with per-day and per-second alert granularity.
  • The customization claim means the same pipeline could be re-trained for a new apartment by changing floor plan, sensor positions, and resident activity statistics in the simulator, avoiding new long-term data collection.
  • The newly proposed detectors for forgetting, being housebound, and being semi-bedridden would be the first ambient-sensor methods for these anomalies with quantitative long-term evaluation, something prior work lacked.
  • Fall while walking remains the weakest link at sensitivity 0.75; the paper suggests oversampling fall training data can raise it, as their earlier study reached 0.96 with about 200 times oversampling.
  • Because the simulator gives exact anomaly intervals, the evaluation metric counts an anomaly as detected if predicted and true intervals overlap even slightly, which is a lenient but practical criterion for alerting.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The principal risk is that real falls are not just 30 seconds of immobility: real post-fall behavior can include crawling, rolling, or sensor activations near furniture, so a detector tuned to the simulator's immobility signature could miss real falls or fire on ordinary naps.
  • The MMSE-driven frequency models mean rare anomalies like semi-bedridden occur only 8 times in nine years of test data; sensitivity of 1.0 on such tiny counts is statistically fragile, and a single missed episode would drop it to 0.875.
  • A cheap partial validation would be to replay real unlabeled sensor logs through the simulator's sensor model and compare activation statistics; if the simulated activity sequence already matches real data as claimed, the main remaining gap is anomaly-event fidelity, which could be checked with diary- or caregiver-confirmed episodes.
  • The system's personalization to a resident is only as good as the fitted activity statistics; residents with atypical daily rhythms or non-sleep bed use (reading, watching TV) would break the sleep-duration estimate that the semi-bedridden detector relies on.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a simulator-based system for detecting six abnormal behaviors of elderly people living alone (semi-bedridden, housebound, forgetting to turn off appliances, wandering, fall while walking, fall while standing). Sensor data from a studio apartment with 41 binary ambient sensors are generated by a simulator; per-anomaly feature sequences are fed to simple classifiers (statistical tests, decision tree, random forest, dynamic naive Bayes, hidden Markov models). Each classifier emits labels at an anomaly-appropriate granularity, from seconds (falls) to days (semi-bedridden). On a single nine-year simulated test sequence, the authors report interval-based sensitivities of 1.0 for semi-bedridden, housebound, forgetting, and wandering (HMM with denoising), 0.92 for fall while standing, and 0.75 for fall while walking, with false alarm rates below 0.02 per day for the headline results.

Significance. If the reported detection rates transferred to real deployment, the unified sensor preprocessing and multi-timescale labeling would be a practical contribution to ambient assisted living, and the public simulator code and explicit anomaly models support reproducibility and customization to new floor plans. The paper is also honest in Section 7.2 about the unresolved sim-to-real gap. However, the significance is heavily conditional: the headline numbers are point estimates from one simulation run, several are based on very small event counts, and the detectors use features that directly mirror the modeled symptoms, so the evidence base for the abstract's claims is substantially weaker than the text suggests.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 6.3 and Table 5] The central claim of sensitivity over 0.9 is not statistically supported for the two long-duration anomalies. With only 8 semi-bedridden and 17 housebound test episodes, the exact binomial 95% lower confidence bound for an observed sensitivity of 1.0 is roughly 0.63 and 0.80 respectively, so the data cannot establish that true sensitivity exceeds 0.9. Moreover, the interval-overlap sensitivity metric counts an episode as detected if any predicted interval overlaps any part of the true interval; Table 5 shows raw per-day sensitivity of 0.80 for semi-bedridden even though interval sensitivity is 1.0, meaning 20% of true episode-days were missed. Report confidence intervals or multiple simulation runs, and present per-unit sensitivity alongside interval sensitivity.
  2. [Section 7.2] The paper itself states that 'the similarity of the simulated anomaly action sequence to real data has not been checked yet.' Since both training and test data are generated by the same simulator using the same anomaly models, the reported sensitivity and false-alarm rates are internal benchmark numbers with respect to those models, not validated performance on real anomalies. The abstract and conclusion nevertheless present them as achievable operational performance. This is a load-bearing limitation that must be fixed by either adding a real-data pilot (even with partial labels) or by explicitly reframing the contributions as a simulator-based internal benchmark with no claim of real-world transfer.
  3. [Section 5.5 and Table 1] There is a direct correspondence between the detection features and the modeled symptoms. The semi-bedridden detector uses daily sleep duration, and the anomaly model is defined as adding a 40-minute nap and increasing rest time by 30 minutes; the housebound detector uses going-out frequency, and the anomaly model is defined as a decrease in going-out frequency. High sensitivity is therefore partly built into the definition of the anomaly, which is appropriate for a demonstration but means the results cannot be read as evidence that the method detects the real-world clinical syndromes. Please state this explicitly and temper the external-validity language accordingly.
  4. [Section 6.4 and Table 5] The claim that the wandering and fall detection results are 'comparable to previous methods' is not supported because the evaluation metrics differ from those in Tables 2 and 3, as the text acknowledges, and because the raw precision values are very low (0.10 for wandering with HMM before denoising, and 0.20 for fall while walking). Without error bars or a common evaluation protocol, a numeric comparison to prior work is not meaningful. Either provide a rigorous comparison (e.g., reimplementing baselines on the same simulated data with the same metrics) or remove the comparability claim.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Introduction and Conclusion] There are several typos that should be corrected, including 'resindent' in the contributions list and 'simlator-ganerated' in the conclusion.
  2. [Table 1] The table header contains a typo ('F orgetting') and the use of an asterisk to define the MMSE-dependent parameters is unclear; a separate legend would improve readability.
  3. [Tables 2 and 3] The abbreviation list includes terms such as CDR and SF-12 that do not appear in those tables, and the sentence 'Abbreviations are; ...' is grammatically incomplete; please make the list self-contained.
  4. [Section 6.1] The notation '9 years (9 · 360 days)' is ambiguous; please write '9 years (9 × 360 days)' and explain why years are defined as 360 days.
  5. [Section 5.5] The rule-based sleep and going-out estimations depend on a one-minute threshold and on the assumption that the bed is used exclusively for sleep, but no sensitivity analysis is reported for these choices; a brief robustness check or an explicit justification would strengthen the method.
  6. [References] There are minor reference formatting issues, such as 'W. Hsuet al.' missing a space and inconsistent spelling of 'Gochoo' versus 'Goccho'; these should be cleaned up.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the internal simulator evaluation is self-consistent, and the paper explicitly flags the unvalidated sim-to-real gap; the main risks are statistical and external-validity concerns, not circular reasoning.

full rationale

The paper's numerical claims are derived entirely within its simulator: features, classifiers, training labels, and test labels all come from the same simulator (Sections 4, 5, and 6.1). This is an internal consistency check, not a circular reduction: the detection classifiers are fit on one 9-year simulation and evaluated on an independent 9-year simulation generated with the same fixed parameters but distinct random draws, and the label-generation mechanism (anomaly models in Table 1) is not the same function as the detector (sleep-duration thresholding, going-out frequency thresholding, decision trees, random forests, and hidden Markov models). The feature choice mirrors the modeled symptom, e.g., semi-bedridden is modeled as an added nap and increased rest time and is detected via daily sleep duration, but that is a designed detector aligned to a definitional symptom, not an equation-level equivalence. The closest concern is Section 7.2, which concedes that 'the similarity [of the simulated anomaly action sequence] to real data has not been checked yet'; this is an honest external-validity limitation, not circularity. The reliance on the authors' prior simulator paper [54] for activity-model realism is a self-citation, but it is code-reproduced and does not assume the six-anomaly detection result. Statistical fragility (e.g., sensitivity 1.0 for semi-bedridden rests on 8 test episodes, and the interval-overlap metric is lenient) is a genuine risk to the headline claim, but it is a correctness and statistical-power issue, not a circularity defect.

Assumptions & free parameters 9 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central performance claim rests on simulator settings that are either chosen by the authors or estimated from training data. Most simulation parameters (MMSE-linear anomaly frequencies, durations, symptom definitions) are not tied to external sources, and the detection thresholds cs and ch are fitted to the simulated training data.

free parameters (9)
  • wandering frequency slope/intercept in MMSE = frequency per month = -1.86M + 56; duration = -0.31M + 9.8 minutes
    These linear functions of MMSE define the wandering anomaly in the simulator (Table 1, Section 4.4); no source is given for the specific coefficients.
  • forgetting frequency slope/intercept in MMSE = -M + 30 per month
    Section 4.4 defines how often forgetting occurs in the simulator.
  • fall frequency slope/intercept in MMSE = -M/15 + 2 per month
    Section 4.4 defines fall frequency for both fall types.
  • semi-bedridden occurrence parameters = 1/20 per month, 30 days average duration; +40 min nap, +30 min rest, outing once/week
    Section 4.3 and Table 1 define the simulated semi-bedridden state.
  • housebound occurrence parameters = 1/10 per month, 14 days average duration; phone once every 3 days, going out once per two weeks
    Section 4.3 and Table 1 define the simulated housebound state.
  • fall immobility duration = average 30 seconds
    Section 4.4 and Table 1 define the simulated fall event length.
  • sleep threshold offset c_s = 0.10
    Selected from [-1,3] to maximize F1 on training data (Section 5.5, step 3).
  • going-out threshold offset c_h = 1.80
    Selected from [-1,3] to maximize F1 on training data (Section 5.5, step 6).
  • walking speed = 68.75 cm/s
    Fixed parameter in simulator (Section 6.1), affects sensor timing for fall and wandering detection.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Daily sleep duration and going-out frequency follow normal distributions with sample-estimated parameters.
    Section 5.5 assumes normality for the statistical tests; if the real distributions are skewed, the threshold rules may misclassify.
  • domain assumption The bed is used only for sleep.
    Section 5.5 explicitly hypothesizes this; reading or other activities in bed would be counted as sleep.
  • domain assumption Resident walks at constant speed along shortest paths.
    Section 4.4 states this simplification, which affects fall location and sensor activation timing.
  • domain assumption The activity model from [54] generates realistic activity sequences.
    Section 7.2 claims the activity sequences are similar to real data, citing [54], but this is not independently verified in this paper.
  • domain assumption Falls are characterized by 30-second immobility without crawling or movement.
    Section 4.4 and 7.3 note that residents may crawl after a fall, which is not modeled.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Long-term Detection System for Six Kinds of Abnormal Behavior of the Elderly Living Alone." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TRCFCTM7

@misc{pith2026241113153,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Long-term Detection System for Six Kinds of Abnormal Behavior of the Elderly Living Alone},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TRCFCTM7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.13153}
}
read the original abstract

The proportion of elderly people is increasing worldwide, particularly those living alone in Japan. As elderly people get older, their risks of physical disabilities and health issues increase. To automatically discover these issues at a low cost in daily life, sensor-based detection in a smart home is promising. As part of the effort towards early detection of abnormal behaviors, we propose a simulator-based detection systems for six typical anomalies: being semi-bedridden, being housebound, forgetting, wandering, fall while walking and fall while standing. Our detection system can be customized for various room layout, sensor arrangement and resident's characteristics by training detection classifiers using the simulator with the parameters fitted to individual cases. Considering that the six anomalies that our system detects have various occurrence durations, such as being housebound for weeks or lying still for seconds after a fall, the detection classifiers of our system produce anomaly labels depending on each anomaly's occurrence duration, e.g., housebound per day and falls per second. We propose a method that standardizes the processing of sensor data, and uses a simple detection approach. Although the validity depends on the realism of the simulation, numerical evaluations using sensor data that includes a variety of resident behavior patterns over nine years as test data show that (1) the methods for detecting wandering and falls are comparable to previous methods, and (2) the methods for detecting being semi-bedridden, being housebound, and forgetting achieve a sensitivity of over 0.9 with fewer than one false alarm every 50 days.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.13153 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Overview of systems. Anomaly detection classifiers are learned by the simulation data generated from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Example of a floor plan and sensor arrangement. The layout is 5 meters by 12 meters. There are chairs (C), [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Illustration of our training data construction using a simulator. Initially, the smart home simulator generates [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

76 extracted references · 74 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Fall detection by ambient sensors on years-long simulation data,

    K. Tanaka, M. Kudo, and K. Kimura, “Fall detection by ambient sensors on years-long simulation data,” in6th International Conference on Activity and Behavior Computing (ABC 2024). Springer, 2024

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    World population ageing 2020 highlights: Living arrangements of older persons,

    United Nations, “World population ageing 2020 highlights: Living arrangements of older persons,” United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, Highlights ST/ESA/SER.A/451, 11 2020

    work page 2020

  3. [3]

    An aging world: 2015,

    W. He, D. Goodkind, and P. Kowal, “An aging world: 2015,” United States Census Bureau, International Population Report P95-16-1, 03 2016

    work page 2015

  4. [4]

    "mini-mental state

    M. F. Folstein, S. E. Folstein, and P. R. McHugh, “"mini-mental state": a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician,” Journal of psychiatric research, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 189–198, 1975

    work page 1975

  5. [5]

    Population-based norms for the mini-mental state examination by age and educational level,

    R. M. Crum, J. C. Anthony, S. S. Bassett, and M. F. Folstein, “Population-based norms for the mini-mental state examination by age and educational level,”Jama, vol. 269, no. 18, pp. 2386–2391, 1993

    work page 1993

  6. [6]

    Reisberg, I

    B. Reisberg, I. A. Jamil, S. Khan, I. Monteiro, C. Torossian, S. Ferris, M. Sabbagh, S. Gauthier, S. Auer, M. B. Shulman, A. Kluger, E. Franssen, and J. Wegiel,Staging Dementia. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2010, ch. 31, pp. 162–169. [Online]. Available: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9780470669600.ch31

    work page doi:10.1002/9780470669600.ch31 2010

  7. [7]

    An 8-year prospective study of the relationship between cognitive performance and falling in very old adults,

    K. J. Anstey, C. V on Sanden, and M. A. Luszcz, “An 8-year prospective study of the relationship between cognitive performance and falling in very old adults,”Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, vol. 54, no. 8, pp. 1169–1176, 2006

    work page 2006

  8. [8]

    Empirical derivation and validation of a wandering typology,

    D. L. Algase, C. L. Antonakos, E. Beattie, C. A. Beel-Bates, and L. Yao, “Empirical derivation and validation of a wandering typology,”Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, vol. 57, 2009. 16 Running Title for Header

    work page 2009

Show all 76 references
  1. [9]

    New parameters for daytime wandering,

    D. Algase, C. Antonakos, E. Beattie, C. Beel-Bates, and L. Yao, “New parameters for daytime wandering,” Research in gerontological nursing, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 58–68, 2009

    2009

  2. [10]

    An international review of long-term care workforce: Policies and shortages,

    S. Hussein and J. Manthorpe, “An international review of long-term care workforce: Policies and shortages,” Journal of aging & social policy, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 75–94, 2005

    2005

  3. [11]

    Impact of increased long-term care insurance payments on employment and wages in formal long-term care,

    A. Kondo, “Impact of increased long-term care insurance payments on employment and wages in formal long-term care,” Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, vol. 53, p. 101034, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889158319300255

    2019

  4. [12]

    How smart is your home?

    D. J. Cook, “How smart is your home?” Science, vol. 335, pp. 1579 – 1581, 2012

    2012

  5. [13]

    Intelligent systems for assessing aging changes: home-based, unobtrusive, and continuous assessment of aging,

    J. A. Kaye, S. A. Maxwell, N. Mattek, T. L. Hayes, H. Dodge, M. Pavel, H. B. Jimison, K. Wild, L. Boise, and T. A. Zitzelberger, “Intelligent systems for assessing aging changes: home-based, unobtrusive, and continuous assessment of aging,” Journals of Gerontology Series B: Ps...

    2011

  6. [14]

    Testing classifiers for embedded health assessment,

    M. Skubic, R. D. Guevara, and M. Rantz, “Testing classifiers for embedded health assessment,” inImpact Analysis of Solutions for Chronic Disease Prevention and Management: 10th International Conference on Smart Homes and Health Telematics, ICOST 2012, Artiminio, Italy, June 12...

    2012

  7. [15]

    Casas: A smart home in a box,

    D. J. Cook, A. S. Crandall, B. L. Thomas, and N. C. Krishnan, “Casas: A smart home in a box,”Computer, vol. 46, no. 7, pp. 62–69, 2013

    2013

  8. [16]

    An integrated home-based self-management system to support the wellbeing of older adults,

    J. Doyle, A. Kealy, J. Loane, L. Walsh, B. O’Mullane, C. Flynn, A. Macfarlane, B. Bortz, R. B. Knapp, and R. Bond, “An integrated home-based self-management system to support the wellbeing of older adults,”Journal of ambient intelligence and smart environments, vol. 6, no. 4, ...

    2014

  9. [17]

    A survey on ambient-assisted living tools for older adults,

    P. Rashidi and A. Mihailidis, “A survey on ambient-assisted living tools for older adults,” IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 579–590, 2013

    2013

  10. [18]

    A survey on anomalous behavior detection for elderly care using dense-sensing networks,

    S. Deep, X. Zheng, C. Karmakar, D. Yu, L. G. Hamey, and J. Jin, “A survey on anomalous behavior detection for elderly care using dense-sensing networks,” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 352–370, 2019

    2019

  11. [19]

    Fall detection monitoring systems: a comprehensive review,

    P. Vallabh and R. Malekian, “Fall detection monitoring systems: a comprehensive review,”Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, vol. 9, pp. 1809–1833, 2018

    2018

  12. [20]

    Unobtrusive assessment of activity patterns associated with mild cognitive impairment,

    T. L. Hayes, F. Abendroth, A. Adami, M. Pavel, T. A. Zitzelberger, and J. A. Kaye, “Unobtrusive assessment of activity patterns associated with mild cognitive impairment,” Alzheimer’s & Dementia, vol. 4, no. 6, pp. 395–405, 2008

    2008

  13. [21]

    Smart home-based prediction of multidomain symptoms related to alzheimer’s disease,

    A. Alberdi, A. Weakley, M. Schmitter-Edgecombe, D. J. Cook, A. Aztiria, A. Basarab, and M. Barrenechea, “Smart home-based prediction of multidomain symptoms related to alzheimer’s disease,” IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 1720–1731, 2018

    2018

  14. [22]

    Detecting and exploring deviating behaviour of smart home residents,

    J. Lundström, E. Järpe, and A. Verikas, “Detecting and exploring deviating behaviour of smart home residents,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 55, pp. 429–440, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957417416300616

    2016

  15. [23]

    Detection of abnormal living patterns for elderly living alone using support vector data description,

    J. H. Shin, B. Lee, and K. S. Park, “Detection of abnormal living patterns for elderly living alone using support vector data description,” IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 438– 448, 2011

    2011

  16. [24]

    A context-aware approach for long-term behavioural change detection and abnormality prediction in ambient assisted living,

    A. R. M. Forkan, I. Khalil, Z. Tari, S. Foufou, and A. Bouras, “A context-aware approach for long-term behavioural change detection and abnormality prediction in ambient assisted living,” Pattern Recognition, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 628–641, 2015

    2015

  17. [25]

    Activity discovery and detection of behavioral deviations of an inhabitant from binary sensors,

    J. Saives, C. Pianon, and G. Faraut, “Activity discovery and detection of behavioral deviations of an inhabitant from binary sensors,” IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 1211–1224, 2015

    2015

  18. [26]

    Smart carpet using differential piezoresistive pres- sure sensors for elderly fall detection,

    K. Chaccour, R. Darazi, A. H. el Hassans, and E. Andres, “Smart carpet using differential piezoresistive pres- sure sensors for elderly fall detection,” in 2015 IEEE 11th International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Computing, Networking and Communications (WiMob). IEEE, 20...

    2015

  19. [27]

    Detection of falls among the elderly by a floor sensor using the electric near field,

    H. Rimminen, J. Lindström, M. Linnavuo, and R. Sepponen, “Detection of falls among the elderly by a floor sensor using the electric near field,”IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine, vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 1475–1476, 2010. 17 Running Title for Header

    2010

  20. [28]

    A smart and passive floor- vibration based fall detector for elderly,

    M. Alwan, P. J. Rajendran, S. Kell, D. Mack, S. Dalal, M. Wolfe, and R. Felder, “A smart and passive floor- vibration based fall detector for elderly,” in2006 2nd International Conference on Information & Communication Technologies, vol. 1. IEEE, 2006, pp. 1003–1007

    2006

  21. [29]

    Fall detection using single-tree complex wavelet transform,

    A. Yazar, F. Keskin, B. U. Töreyin, and A. E. Çetin, “Fall detection using single-tree complex wavelet transform,” Pattern Recognition Letters, vol. 34, no. 15, pp. 1945–1952, 2013

    1945

  22. [30]

    Vampir-an automatic fall detection system using a vertical pir sensor array,

    M. Popescu, B. Hotrabhavananda, M. Moore, and M. Skubic, “Vampir-an automatic fall detection system using a vertical pir sensor array,” in 2012 6th International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare (PervasiveHealth) and Workshops. IEEE, 2012, pp. 163–166

    2012

  23. [31]

    Privacy-preserved behavior analysis and fall detection by an infrared ceiling sensor network,

    S. Tao, M. Kudo, and H. Nonaka, “Privacy-preserved behavior analysis and fall detection by an infrared ceiling sensor network,” Sensors, vol. 12, no. 12, pp. 16 920–16 936, 2012

    2012

  24. [32]

    Cnn for elderly wandering prediction in indoor scenarios,

    R. Oliveira, R. Feres, F. Barreto, and R. Abreu, “Cnn for elderly wandering prediction in indoor scenarios,”SN Computer Science, vol. 3, no. 3, p. 230, 2022

    2022

  25. [33]

    Detecting dementia-related wandering locomotion of elders by leveraging active infrared sensors,

    Q. Lin, W. Zhao, and W. Wang, “Detecting dementia-related wandering locomotion of elders by leveraging active infrared sensors,” Journal of Computer and Communications, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 94–105, 2018

    2018

  26. [34]

    Elderly-care motion sensor using uwb-ir,

    K. Ota, Y . Ota, M. Otsu, and A. Kajiwara, “Elderly-care motion sensor using uwb-ir,” in 2011 IEEE Sensors Applications Symposium. IEEE, 2011, pp. 159–162

    2011

  27. [35]

    A light-weight system for detecting indoor wandering of demented elders living alone,

    W. Zhao, X. Zhou, H. Ni, and Q. Lin, “A light-weight system for detecting indoor wandering of demented elders living alone,” in 2014 International Conference on Orange Technologies. IEEE, 2014, pp. 53–56

    2014

  28. [36]

    Device-free non-privacy invasive classification of elderly travel patterns in a smart house using pir sensors and dcnn,

    M. Gochoo, T.-H. Tan, V . Velusamy, S.-H. Liu, D. Bayanduuren, and S.-C. Huang, “Device-free non-privacy invasive classification of elderly travel patterns in a smart house using pir sensors and dcnn,” IEEE Sensors Journal, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 390–400, 2017

    2017

  29. [37]

    Sensor signals-based early dementia detection system using travel pattern classification,

    A. Chaudhary, H. P. Gupta, K. Shukla, and T. Dutta, “Sensor signals-based early dementia detection system using travel pattern classification,” IEEE Sensors Journal, vol. 20, no. 23, pp. 14 474–14 481, 2020

    2020

  30. [38]

    Collaborative trajectory mining in smart-homes to support early diagnosis of cognitive decline,

    E. Khodabandehloo and D. Riboni, “Collaborative trajectory mining in smart-homes to support early diagnosis of cognitive decline,” IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computing, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 1194–1205, 2020

    2020

  31. [39]

    Designing an iot based kitchen monitoring and automation system for gas and fire detection,

    M. Logeshwaran and J. J. J. S. ME, “Designing an iot based kitchen monitoring and automation system for gas and fire detection,” in 2022 6th International Conference on Computing Methodologies and Communication (ICCMC). IEEE, 2022, pp. 346–353

    2022

  32. [40]

    Application of internet of things in a kitchen fire prevention system,

    W.-L. Hsu, J.-Y . Jhuang, C.-S. Huang, C.-K. Liang, and Y .-C. Shiau, “Application of internet of things in a kitchen fire prevention system,” Applied Sciences, vol. 9, no. 17, p. 3520, 2019

    2019

  33. [41]

    Pervasive intelligence system to enable safety and assistance in kitchen for home-alone elderly,

    A. A. P. Wai, S. Shanthini Devi, J. Biswas, and S. K. Panda, “Pervasive intelligence system to enable safety and assistance in kitchen for home-alone elderly,” inToward Useful Services for Elderly and People with Disabilities: 9th International Conference on Smart Homes and He...

    2011

  34. [42]

    Recognizing long-term sleep behaviour change using clustering for elderly in smart homes,

    Z. K. Shahid, S. Saguna, and C. Åhlund, “Recognizing long-term sleep behaviour change using clustering for elderly in smart homes,” in 2022 IEEE International Smart Cities Conference (ISC2). IEEE, 2022, pp. 1–7

    2022

  35. [43]

    A unified framework for modeling and predicting going-out behavior,

    S. Tominaga, M. Shimosaka, R. Fukui, and T. Sato, “A unified framework for modeling and predicting going-out behavior,” inPervasive Computing: 10th International Conference, Pervasive 2012, Newcastle, UK, June 18-22,

    2012

  36. [44]

    A consensus novelty detection ensemble approach for anomaly detection in activities of daily living,

    S. W. Yahaya, A. Lotfi, and M. Mahmud, “A consensus novelty detection ensemble approach for anomaly detection in activities of daily living,” Applied Soft Computing, vol. 83, p. 105613, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S156849461930393X

    2019

  37. [45]

    Toxicity and response criteria of the eastern cooperative oncology group,

    M. M. Oken, R. H. Creech, D. C. Tormey, J. Horton, T. E. Davis, E. T. McFadden, and P. P. Carbone, “Toxicity and response criteria of the eastern cooperative oncology group,”American journal of clinical oncology, vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 649–656, 1982

    1982

  38. [46]

    Bedridden elderly: Factors and risks,

    R. Normala and Z. Lukman, “Bedridden elderly: Factors and risks,” International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation, vol. 7, no. 8, pp. 46–49, 2020

    2020

  39. [47]

    Factors related to frequency of engaging in outside activities among elderly persons living an independent life at home,

    M. Ishikawa, K. Tamakoshi, H. Yatsuya, K. Suma, K. Wada, R. Otsuka, K. Matsushita, H. Zhang, C. Murata, T. Kondo et al., “Factors related to frequency of engaging in outside activities among elderly persons living an independent life at home,” Nagoya journal of medical science...

    2006

  40. [48]

    Characteristics of rural homebound older adults: a community-based study,

    M. Ganguli, A. Fox, J. Gilby, and S. Belle, “Characteristics of rural homebound older adults: a community-based study,”Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 363–370, 1996. 18 Running Title for Header

    1996

  41. [49]

    Housebound elderly people: Definition, prevalence and characteristics,

    J. Lindesay and C. Thompson, “Housebound elderly people: Definition, prevalence and characteristics,” pp. 231–237, 1993

    1993

  42. [50]

    Travel Behavior of Nursing Home Residents Perceived as Wanderers and Nonwanderers,

    D. Martino-Saltzman, B. B. Blasch, R. D. Morris, and L. W. McNeal, “Travel Behavior of Nursing Home Residents Perceived as Wanderers and Nonwanderers,”The Gerontologist, vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 666–672, 10 1991. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/31.5.666

    1991 doi

  43. [51]

    Cardiorespiratory fitness, hippocampal volume, and frequency of forgetting in older adults

    A. N. Szabo, E. McAuley, K. I. Erickson, M. V oss, R. S. Prakash, E. L. Mailey, T. R. Wójcicki, S. M. White, N. Gothe, E. A. Olson et al., “Cardiorespiratory fitness, hippocampal volume, and frequency of forgetting in older adults.” Neuropsychology, vol. 25, no. 5, p. 545, 2011

    2011

  44. [52]

    From fall detection to fall prevention: A generic classification of fall-related systems,

    K. Chaccour, R. Darazi, A. H. El Hassani, and E. Andres, “From fall detection to fall prevention: A generic classification of fall-related systems,” IEEE Sensors Journal, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 812–822, 2016

    2016

  45. [53]

    Patient falls in stroke rehabilitation: a challenge to rehabilitation strategies,

    L. Nyberg and Y . Gustafson, “Patient falls in stroke rehabilitation: a challenge to rehabilitation strategies,”Stroke, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 838–842, 1995

    1995

  46. [54]

    Sensor data simulation for anomaly detection of the elderly living alone,

    K. Tanaka, M. Kudo, and K. Kimura, “Sensor data simulation for anomaly detection of the elderly living alone,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 11, no. 19, pp. 31 675–31 686, 2024

    2024

  47. [55]

    Falls by elderly people at home: prevalence and associated factors,

    A. Blake, K. Morgan, M. Bendall, H. Dallosso, S. Ebrahim, T. a. Arie, P. Fentem, and E. Bassey, “Falls by elderly people at home: prevalence and associated factors,” Age and ageing, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 365–372, 1988

    1988

  48. [56]

    Ambient technology to assist elderly people in indoor risks,

    R. Yared and B. Abdulrazak, “Ambient technology to assist elderly people in indoor risks,”Computers, vol. 5, no. 4, p. 22, 2016

    2016

  49. [57]

    Managing elders’ wandering behavior using sensors-based solutions: a survey,

    Q. Lin, D. Zhang, L. Chen, H. Ni, and X. Zhou, “Managing elders’ wandering behavior using sensors-based solutions: a survey,” International Journal of Gerontology, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 49–55, 2014

    2014

  50. [58]

    Forecasting behavior in smart homes based on sleep and wake patterns,

    J. A. Williams and D. J. Cook, “Forecasting behavior in smart homes based on sleep and wake patterns,” Technology and Health Care, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 89–110, 2017

    2017

  51. [59]

    Estimation of rest-activity patterns using motion sensors,

    T. L. Hayes, T. Riley, M. Pavel, and J. A. Kaye, “Estimation of rest-activity patterns using motion sensors,” in 2010 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology. IEEE, 2010, pp. 2147–2150

    2010

  52. [60]

    Autonomous unobtrusive detection of mild cognitive impairment in older adults,

    A. Akl, B. Taati, and A. Mihailidis, “Autonomous unobtrusive detection of mild cognitive impairment in older adults,” IEEE transactions on biomedical engineering, vol. 62, no. 5, pp. 1383–1394, 2015

    2015

  53. [61]

    Management of dementia and depression utilizing in-home passive sensor data,

    C. Galambos, M. Skubic, S. Wang, and M. Rantz, “Management of dementia and depression utilizing in-home passive sensor data,” Gerontechnology: international journal on the fundamental aspects of technology to serve the ageing society, vol. 11, no. 3, p. 457, 2013

    2013

  54. [62]

    Anomaly detection algorithm based on life pattern extraction from accumulated pyroelectric sensor data,

    T. Mori, R. Urushibata, M. Shimosaka, H. Noguchi, and T. Sato, “Anomaly detection algorithm based on life pattern extraction from accumulated pyroelectric sensor data,” in 2008 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. IEEE, 2008, pp. 2545–2552

    2008

  55. [63]

    Automated detection of wandering patterns in people with dementia,

    N. K. Vuong, S. Chan, and C. T. Lau, “Automated detection of wandering patterns in people with dementia,” Gerontechnology, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 127–147, 2014

    2014

  56. [64]

    A scalable semantic framework for iot healthcare applications,

    R. Zgheib, S. Kristiansen, E. Conchon, T. Plageman, V . Goebel, and R. Bastide, “A scalable semantic framework for iot healthcare applications,” Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 4883–4901, 2023

    2023

  57. [65]

    Activity recognition on streaming sensor data,

    N. C. Krishnan and D. J. Cook, “Activity recognition on streaming sensor data,”Pervasive and mobile computing, vol. 10, pp. 138–154, 2014

    2014

  58. [66]

    A method of assessing change in a single subject: An alteration of the rc index,

    L. Christensen, “A method of assessing change in a single subject: An alteration of the rc index,” Behav Ther, vol. 17, pp. 305–308, 1986

    1986

  59. [67]

    Human activity recognition from wireless sensor network data: Benchmark and software,

    T. L. van Kasteren, G. Englebienne, and B. J. Kröse, “Human activity recognition from wireless sensor network data: Benchmark and software,” in Activity recognition in pervasive intelligent environments. Springer, 2011, pp. 165–186

    2011

  60. [68]

    Random forests,

    L. Breiman, “Random forests,” Machine learning, vol. 45, pp. 5–32, 2001

    2001

  61. [69]

    A comparison of dynamic naive bayesian classifiers and hidden markov models for gesture recognition,

    H. Avilés-Arriaga, L. Sucar-Succar, C. Mendoza-Durán, and L. Pineda-Cortés, “A comparison of dynamic naive bayesian classifiers and hidden markov models for gesture recognition,” Journal of applied research and technology, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 81–102, 2011

    2011

  62. [70]

    A tutorial on hidden markov models and selected applications in speech recognition,

    L. R. Rabiner, “A tutorial on hidden markov models and selected applications in speech recognition,”Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 77, no. 2, pp. 257–286, 1989. 19 Running Title for Header

    1989

  63. [71]

    Classification and regression trees,

    W.-Y . Loh, “Classification and regression trees,”Wiley interdisciplinary reviews: data mining and knowledge discovery, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 14–23, 2011

    2011

  64. [72]

    Sensitivity and false alarm rate of a fall sensor in long-term fall detection in the elderly,

    M. Kangas, R. Korpelainen, I. Vikman, L. Nyberg, and T. Jämsä, “Sensitivity and false alarm rate of a fall sensor in long-term fall detection in the elderly,”Gerontology, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 61–68, 2014

    2014

  65. [73]

    Falls are unintentional: Studying simulations is a waste of faking time,

    E. Stack, “Falls are unintentional: Studying simulations is a waste of faking time,” Journal of Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies Engineering, vol. 4, p. 2055668317732945, 2017

    2017

  66. [74]

    A federated learning approach to anomaly detection in smart buildings,

    R. A. Sater and A. B. Hamza, “A federated learning approach to anomaly detection in smart buildings,” ACM Transactions on Internet of Things, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 1–23, 2021

    2021

  67. [75]

    Unsupervised statistical concept drift detection for behaviour abnormality detection,

    B. Friedrich, T. Sawabe, and A. Hein, “Unsupervised statistical concept drift detection for behaviour abnormality detection,” Applied Intelligence, vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 2527–2537, 2023. 20

    2023

  68. [2012]

    Springer, 2012, pp

    Proceedings 10. Springer, 2012, pp. 73–90

    2012

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.