Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
3, SEPTEMBER 2001
261
I. INTRODUCTION
S COMPUTING becomes more ubiquitous and distributed, there is a growing need for humancomputer
interfaces that support a new interaction paradigm. Efforts
are currently underway to develop a novel haptic interface
system around an object that is involved in virtually all
humancomputer interactions, yet has so far remained sensory
and information depriveda chair. The chair is said to be
sensory deprived because it can not sense the actions of its
occupant and therefore can not interpret the users intentions.
The chair is said to be information deprived because it does not
provide any useful information to its occupant. The chair that
is available today is, therefore, a passive object that does not
respond to its users needs.
To enable a chair to sense and interpret its occupants actions, pressure distribution sensors are surface-mounted on the
seatpan and backrest of a sensing chair. To enable a chair to deManuscript received March 28, 2000; revised February 20, 2001. Recommended by Guest Editor N. Xi. This work was supported in part by British
Telecom, Things That Think consortium at the M.I.T. Media Laboratory,
Steelcase NA, a Research Grant from Purdue Research Foundation, and by a
National Science Foundation Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER)
Award under Grant 9984991-IIS.
H. Z. Tan and L. A. Slivovsky are with the Haptic Interface Research
Laboratory, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907 USA (e-mail:
hongtan@purdue.edu; lynnes@purdue.edu).
A. Pentland is with the Media Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA (e-mail: sandy@media.mit.edu).
Publisher Item Identifier S 1083-4435(01)08147-9.
262
Fig. 1.
263
Fig. 3. A full pressure map for the posture left leg crossed shown as a 2-D
grayscale image. The top, bottom, left, and right sides of the map correspond
to the shoulder area, knee area, right side, and left side of the occupant,
respectively.
3By user independence, we refer to a system that works for people who have
not contributed to a training database, but whose anthropometry is well represented by the database.
264
Fig. 4.
3-D views of a pressure map for the posture seated upright, before (left) and after (right) smoothing.
the same plane. Therefore, the top, bottom, left and right sides
of the pressure map shown in Fig. 3 correspond to the shoulder
area, knee area, right, and left sides of the occupant, respectively.
The size of each full pressure map is 84-by-48 (2 42-by-48),
or 4,032 pixels.
The raw pressure distribution map is typically noisy (spikes
in the left image of Fig. 4). The noise is removed by convolving
the pressure map with a 3-by-3 smoothing kernel
set of
eigenvectors
are calculated4
such that their corresponding eigenvalues
are monotonically decreasing
. These
can be thought of as forming an -dimeneigenvectors
sional eigenposture space where a 4032-element pressure map
weights of its projection onto this
can be represented by the
eigenspace. We have thus effectively reduced the representation of each pressure map from a 4032-dimensional space to
an -dimensional space. Furthermore, we can choose to use
eigenvectors whose eigenvalues
only the first
are the largest to further improve computational efficiency (see
Section V). The process shown in Fig. 5 is repeated for all static
postures. Note that the calculation of eigenposture spaces is performed off line.
Given a test pressure map , the second step of posture classification proceeds as follows in real time (Fig. 6). The test map
is first projected onto the eigenposture spaces calculated
during the training step. This is done by subtracting the average
265
pressure map
for each posture from , and
finding the inner dot product of the mean-adjusted posture map
with each of the eigenvectors in the corresponding eigenposture space. The result is a point in th eigen, where
posture space specified by the weights
denotes the th eigenvector in the th eigenposture space.
in
These weights are used to calculate the reconstruction of
. The
each of the eigenposture spaces as
and its
reconstructions, the so-called
distances between
distance from posture space (DFPS), can then be computed as
. To the extent that
is well represented by
eigenposture spaces (as indicated by a minimum
one of the
), the corresponding posture label
is used to classify .
B. A Single-User Static Posture Classification System
As a proof of concept, a single-user static posture classification system was implemented on a Pentium PC in Windows
3.11 environment (required by the hardware driver) [26], [27].
sitting postures, and
Training data on a total of
pressure distribution samples per posture were collected on the
first author. The postures were: 1) seated upright; 2) leaning
forward; 3) leaning left; 4) leaning right; 5) right leg crossed
(with knees touching); 6) right leg crossed (with right foot on
left knee); 7) left leg crossed (with knees touching); 8) left leg
crossed (with left foot on right knee); 9) left foot on seatpan
under right thigh; 10) right foot on seatpan under left thigh; 11)
leaning left with right leg crossed; 12) leaning right with left
leg crossed; 13) leaning back; and 14) slouching. These postures were considered to be representative of the typical sitting
postures that can be found in an office environment [13]. During
eigenposture spaces were calculated,
the training step,
pressure distribution samples. During claseach from
sification, a new pressure distribution map was first tested for
empty seat by comparing the sum of all pixel values with a
preset threshold. Once a pressure map passed this initial test, it
was projected onto the 14 eigenposture spaces and the smallest
, was found. If
was below a preset threshold
DFPS,
value, then the corresponding eigenposture space was used to
label the new pressure map. Otherwise, the system declared the
posture to be unknown.
This single-user system was able to classify sitting postures
of the first author with an average accuracy of over 95%. Encouraged by this result, but realizing that the system had to be
retrained for each new user, we quickly moved to a multiuser
static posture classification system.
C. A Multiuser Static Posture Classification System
Our current multiuser static posture classification system has
been implemented on a Pentium PC in Windows 98 environment [25]. In order to facilitate the training and evaluation of
this system, a static posture database has been collected on 30
sitting postures.
subjects (15 females and 15 males) for
The subjects are selected with the goal to cover a wide distribution of anthropometric measurements. The ranges of subjects
height, weight, and age are 152191 cm, 45.5118.2 kg, and
1860 years old, respectively. Each subject has contributed five
pressure distribution samples per posture. There are therefore
training samples per posture, and the training database consists of a total of 1500 pressure distribution maps.5
5Our
static
posture
database
is
available
http://www.ece.purdue.edu/HIRL/projects_chair.html.
[online]
at
266
Fig. 8. Classification accuracy for familiar and new subjects. Solid, dashed and dotted lines correspond to accuracies associated with the smallest " value, first
two smallest " values, and the first three smallest " values, respectively.
tures that have very similar pressure distribution maps (for example, 95.2% for leaning left, 95.1% for right leg crossed,
and 93.5% for leaning left with right leg crossed).
Secondly, a total of 400 pressure distribution maps have been
collected from eight new subjects (five samples per posture per
subject) who did not contribute to the static posture database.
The ranges of subjects height and weight are 160191 cm and
65.993.6 kg, respectively. These anthropometric values are
within those represented in the static posture database. Shown
in Fig. 8 (solid line in the right graph) are the classification
accuracies averaged over postures as a function of number of
eigenvectors used in classification. Compared with Fig. 7, it
is clear that classification performance is better with subjects
the system is familiar with. In an effort to locate the sources
of error, we examined the posture labels associated with not
only the minimum DFPS,
(the first choice), but also
those with the next two smallest values (the second and third
choices). The results are shown as dashed lines in the right
graph of Fig. 8 for new subjects. The middle and top curves
(dashed and dotted lines, respectively) reveal the classification
accuracies that can be potentially achieved if the correct posture
label is associated with the first two or three smallest values,
respectively. The corresponding results for the pressure maps
collected from familiar subjects are shown on the left of
Fig. 8. Note that the top curves in both graphs of Fig. 8 are in
the upper nineties, indicating that similar performance levels
with both familiar and new subject groups can be achieved
if the correct posture label can be derived from the first three
smallest values.
Execution time for the classification subroutine as a function
of number of eigenvectors used has also been measured, with
source codes that have yet to be optimized for speed. This is an
important parameter for any real-time application of our system.
The average classification time for 5, 10, 15, or 20 eigenvectors is 62.1, 107.8, 168.1, or 241.0 ms, respectively. The corresponding average classification accuracy (for familiar subjects) is 88, 95, 96, or 96%, respectively. In view of these mea(out of
) eigenvectors corresurements,
sponding to the 15 largest eigenvalues are used for the static
posture classification system.
VI. SUMMARY
We have described a static posture classification system based
on a sensing chair that monitors the pressure distribution patterns on its surfaces in real time. The PCA technique, commonly used in computer and robot vision, has been successfully
applied to the problem of posture classification from pressure
maps. A PCA-based algorithm has the advantage of being very
fast. Its disadvantage is the lack of physical interpretations associated with eigenposture spaces. Our current system runs in
real-time (with an update rate of roughly 6 Hz) on a Pentium
PC in Windows 98 environment. Average classification accuracy is 96% for subjects the system had felt before, and 79%
for those who are new to the system. We are currently investigating ways to improve the systems accuracy for new subjects
by taking into account the first three eigenposture spaces that are
closest to the test pressure map. Future work is aimed toward a
dynamic posture tracking system that continuously tracks not
only steady-state (static) but transitional (dynamic) sitting postures.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors wish to thank Dr. B. Moghaddam for the
MATLAB code used in computing eigenposture spaces from
training data. The comments from the three anonymous reviewers are greatly appreciated.
REFERENCES
[1] R. I. Barnett and F. E. Shelton, Measurement of support surface efficacy: Pressure, J. Prevent. Healing: Adv. Wound Care, vol. 10, no. 7,
pp. 2129, 1997.
[2] J. A. Birke, J. G. Foto, S. Deepak, and J. Watson, Measurement of
pressure walking in footwear used in leprosy, Lepra Rev., vol. 65, pp.
262271, 1994.
[3] R. A. Brooks, Model-based three-dimensional interpretations of twodimensional images, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Machine Intell., vol. 5,
pp. 140150, 1983.
[4] M. H. Coen, The future of humancomputer interaction, or how I
learned to stop worrying and love my intelligent room, IEEE Intell.
Syst., vol. 14, pp. 810, Mar./Apr. 1999.
[5] D. Cohen, An objective measure of seat comfort, J. Aviat., Space Environmen. Med., vol. 69, pp. 410414, 1998.
[6] S. F. Conti, R. L. Martin, E. R. Chaytor, C. Hughes, and L. Luttrell,
Plantar pressure measurements during ambulation in weightbearing
conventional short leg casts and total contact casts, Foot Ankle Int.,
vol. 17, pp. 464469, 1996.
[7] P. Coy, Ready for its maiden flight: A new airline seat, Bus. Week, pp.
199199, Nov. 1996.
[8] J. L. Flanagan, Autodirective sound capture: Toward smarter conference rooms, IEEE Intell. Syst., vol. 14, pp. 1619, Mar./Apr. 1999.
[9] D. Franklin, The intelligent classroom, IEEE Intell. Syst., vol. 14, pp.
25, Sept./Oct. 1999.
[10] K. Fukunaga, Introduction to Statistical Pattern Recognition, 2nd
ed. New York: Academic, 1990.
[11] T. Harada, T. Mori, Y. Nishida, T. Yoshimi, and T. Sato, Body parts
positions and posture estimation system based on pressure distribution
image, in Proc. 1999 IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and Automation, Detroit,
MI, May 1999, pp. 968975.
[12] E. C. Hughes, W. Shen, and A. Vertiz, The effects of regional compliance and instantaneous stiffness on seat back comfort, in SAE Tech.
Paper Series, 1998, no. 980 658, pp. 105115.
[13] R. Lueder and K. Noro, Hard Facts About Soft Machines: The Ergonomics of Seating. New York: Taylor & Francis, 1994.
[14] G. A. Miller, The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some
limits on our capacity for processing information, The Psycholog. Rev.,
vol. 63, pp. 8197, 1956.
[15] M. C. Mozer, An intelligent environment must be adaptive, IEEE Intell. Syst. Mag., vol. 14, pp. 1113, Mar./Apr. 1999.
267
[16] M. J. Mueller and M. J. Strube, Generalizability of in-shoe peak pressure measures using the F-scan system, Clin. Biomechan., vol. 11, pp.
159164, 1996.
[17] H. Murase and S. K. Nayar, Visual learning and recognition of 3D objects from appearance, Int. J. Comput. Vision, vol. 14, pp. 524, 1995.
[18] B. Noble and J. W. Daniel, Applied Linear Algebra. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1988.
[19] S. Oviatt, Ten myths of multimodal interaction, Commun. ACM, vol.
42, pp. 7481, 1999.
[20] A. Pentland, Perceptual intelligence, Commun. ACM, vol. 43, pp.
3544, Mar. 2000.
[21] A. Pentland, B. Moghaddam, and T. Starner, View-based and modular
eigenspaces for face recognition, in Proc. IEEE Conf. Computer Vision
and Pattern Recognition, 1994, pp. 8491.
[22] P. Pentland, Smart Rooms, Scient. American, vol. 274, pp. 6876, Apr.
1996.
[23] M. Reed and C. Grant, Development of a measurement protocol and
analysis techniques for assessment of body pressure distributions on office chairs, Univ. Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1993.
[24] M. Roach, Hot seat, Discover, pp. 7477, Mar. 1998.
[25] L. A. Slivovsky and H. Z. Tan, A real-time sitting posture tracking
system Purdue Univ. Tech. Rep., Sch. Elect. Comput. Eng., Purdue
Univ., West Lafayette, IN, TR-ECE 00-1.
[26] H. Z. Tan, A sensing chair, in Proc. ASME Dynam. Syst. Contr. Div.,
vol. 67, New York, 1999, pp. 313317.
[27] H. Z. Tan, I. Lu, and A. Pentland, The chair as a novel haptic user interface, in In Proc. Workshop on Perceptual User Interfaces (PUI97),
Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 1921, pp. 5657, 1997.
[28] H. Z. Tan and A. Pentland, Tactual displays for wearable computing,
Personal Technol., vol. 1, pp. 225230, 1997.
[29] M. C. Torrance, Advances in humancomputer interaction: The intelligent room, in Proc. CHI95 Research Symp., Denver, CO.
[30] Proc. Workshop on Perceptual User Interfaces (PUI97), M. Turk, Ed.,
Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 1921, 1997.
[31] Proc. Workshop on Perceptual User Interfaces (PUI98) , M. Turk, Ed.,
San Francisco, CA, Nov. 46, 1998.
[32] M. Turk and A. Pentland, Eigenfaces for recognition, J. Cognitive
Neurosci., vol. 3, pp. 7186, 1991.
268