| Literature DB >> 32731465 |
Leyuan Liu1, Yibin Hou1,2, Jian He1,2, Jonathan Lungu1, Ruihai Dong3.
Abstract
A fall detection module is an important component of community-based care for the elderly to reduce their health risk. It requires the accuracy of detections as well as maintains energy saving. In order to meet the above requirements, a sensing module-integrated energy-efficient sensor was developed which can sense and cache the data of human activity in sleep mode, and an interrupt-driven algorithm is proposed to transmit the data to a server integrated with ZigBee. Secondly, a deep neural network for fall detection (FD-DNN) running on the server is carefully designed to detect falls accurately. FD-DNN, which combines the convolutional neural networks (CNN) with long short-term memory (LSTM) algorithms, was tested on both with online and offline datasets. The experimental result shows that it takes advantage of CNN and LSTM, and achieved 99.17% fall detection accuracy, while its specificity and sensitivity are 99.94% and 94.09%, respectively. Meanwhile, it has the characteristics of low power consumption.Entities:
Keywords: FD-DNN; ZigBee; energy-efficient; fall detection
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32731465 PMCID: PMC7435651 DOI: 10.3390/s20154192
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1The model of human motion.
Figure 2The module layout.
Figure 3The flowchart of the data sensing and transmission algorithm.
Figure 4The architecture of the FD-DNN.
Figure 5The experimental environment for fall detection.
Platform configuration of the server.
| Platform | Configuration |
|---|---|
| Operating system | Ubuntu 16.04.1 LTS |
| CPU | Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10 GHz |
| GPU | NVIDIA Tesla M40 12 G |
| RAM | 125 G |
| Data processing | Pandas, Numpy |
| Deep learning framework | TensorFlow 1.3.0 |
Figure 6The SisFall data sensing device’s position and coordinate system.
The composition of the Joint-Dataset.
| Activity | Joint-Dataset | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Samples from SisFall Dataset | Samples from MobiFall Dataset | Samples Collected by the Designed Module | |
| Walking | 0 | 1000 | 200 |
| Jogging | 0 | 1000 | 200 |
| Jumping | 0 | 1000 | 200 |
| Going upstairs | 0 | 1000 | 200 |
| Going downstairs | 0 | 1000 | 200 |
| Standing up | 1000 | 0 | 200 |
| Sitting down | 1000 | 0 | 200 |
| Fall | 500 | 500 | 200 |
| Total | 2500 | 5500 | 1600 |
The Joint-Dataset for experiment.
| Activity | Training Data | Validation Data | Test Data |
|---|---|---|---|
| Walking | 840 | 120 | 240 |
| Jogging | 840 | 120 | 240 |
| Jumping | 840 | 120 | 240 |
| Going upstairs | 840 | 120 | 240 |
| Going downstairs | 840 | 120 | 240 |
| Standing up | 840 | 120 | 240 |
| Sitting down | 840 | 120 | 240 |
| Fall | 840 | 120 | 240 |
| Total | 6720 | 960 | 1920 |
Performance comparison on FD-DNN, CNN, and LSTM.
| Algorithm | Accuracy (%) | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Test Time(S) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FD-DNN | 99.17 | 94.09 | 99.94 | 1.05 |
| LSTM | 96.88 | 81.47 | 99.57 | 3.87 |
| CNN | 98.13 | 87.50 | 99.88 | 0.65 |
Performance comparison on different algorithms.
| Algorithm | Accuracy (%) | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Test Time (S) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FD-DNN | 99.17 | 94.09 | 99.94 | 1.05 |
| Naive Bayes | 90.10 | 95.65 | 99.93 | 8.87 |
| Bayes Net | 94.07 | 97.58 | 100.00 | 3.98 |
| Random Forest | 94.50 | 99.03 | 99.93 | 1.57 |
| Random Tree | 80.32 | 92.27 | 98.51 | 1.21 |
| Bagging | 91.29 | 97.58 | 99.73 | 0.04 |
| J48 | 84.65 | 95.65 | 99.26 | 1.12 |
| LogitBoost | 81.80 | 99.65 | 99.80 | 0.05 |
| SimpleLogistic | 79.73 | 98.07 | 99.80 | 0.19 |
Confusion matrix of offline test.
| Predicted Activity | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Falling | Standing Up | Walking | Jogging | Jumping | Going Upstairs | Going Downstairs | Sitting Down | ||
| Actual Activity | Falling | 239 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Standing up | 0 | 234 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | |
| Walking | 0 | 0 | 240 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Jogging | 0 | 0 | 0 | 239 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
| Jumping | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 240 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Going upstairs | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 238 | 2 | 0 | |
| Going downstairs | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 238 | 0 | |
| Sitting down | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 236 | |
Information for volunteers over 65.
| ID | Age | Gender |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 65 | male |
| 2 | 65 | female |
| 3 | 66 | male |
| 4 | 67 | male |
| 5 | 68 | female |
| 6 | 68 | male |
| 7 | 69 | female |
| 8 | 69 | female |
Figure 7Ablation test accuracy of different convolutional layers.