Document Open Access Logo

A Temporal Logic for Modelling Activities of Daily Living

Authors Malte S. Kließ , Catholijn M. Jonker , M. Birna van Riemsdijk

PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.TIME.2018.17.pdf
  • Filesize: 499 kB
  • 15 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Malte S. Kließ
  • Interactive Intelligence, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands
Catholijn M. Jonker
  • Interactive Intelligence, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands and , Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science, Leiden University
M. Birna van Riemsdijk
  • Interactive Intelligence, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands

Funding

This work is part of the research programme CoreSAEP, with project number 639.022.416, which is financed by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO).

Cite AsGet BibTex

Malte S. Kließ, Catholijn M. Jonker, and M. Birna van Riemsdijk. A Temporal Logic for Modelling Activities of Daily Living. In 25th International Symposium on Temporal Representation and Reasoning (TIME 2018). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 120, pp. 17:1-17:15, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2018)
https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.TIME.2018.17

Abstract

Behaviour support technology is aimed at assisting people in organizing their Activities of Daily Living (ADLs). Numerous frameworks have been developed for activity recognition and for generating specific types of support actions, such as reminders. The main goal of our research is to develop a generic formal framework for representing and reasoning about ADLs and their temporal relations. This framework should facilitate modelling and reasoning about 1) durative activities, 2) relations between higher-level activities and subactivities, 3) activity instances, and 4) activity duration. In this paper we present a temporal logic as an extension of the logic TPTL for specification of real-time systems. Our logic TPTL_{bih} is defined over Behaviour Identification Hierarchies (BIHs) for representing ADL structure and typical activity duration. To model execution of ADLs, states of the temporal traces in TPTL_{bih} comprise information about the start, stop and current execution of activities. We provide a number of constraints on these traces that we stipulate are desired for the accurate representation of ADL execution, and investigate corresponding validities in the logic. To evaluate the expressivity of the logic, we give a formal definition for the notion of Coherence for (complex) activities, by which we mean that an activity is done without interruption and in a timely fashion. We show that the definition is satisfiable in our framework. In this way the logic forms the basis for a generic monitoring and reasoning framework for ADLs.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Modal and temporal logics
Keywords
  • Temporal Logic
  • Reasoning
  • Durative Activities

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads
    0
    Metadata Views

References

  1. Rajeev Alur and Thomas A. Henzinger. A really temporal logic. J. ACM, 41(1):181-203, 1994. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/174644.174651.
  2. Giulia Andrighetto, Guido Governatori, Pablo Noriega, and Leendert van der Torre, editors. Normative Multi-Agent Systems, volume 4 of Dagstuhl Follow-Ups. Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, 2013. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.4230/DFU.Vol4.12111.i.
  3. Jan Broersen, Frank Dignum, Virginia Dignum, and John-Jules Ch Meyer. Designing a deontic logic of deadlines. In Proceedings Seventh International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON'04), volume 3065 of LNCS, pages 43-56. Springer-Verlag, 2004. Google Scholar
  4. Stephen Cranefield. A rule language for modelling and monitoring social expectations in multi-agent systems. In Coordination, Organizations, Institutions, and Norms in Multi-Agent Systems (ANIREM'05 and OOOP'05), volume 3913 of LNCS, pages 246-258, 2006. Google Scholar
  5. F. Dignum and R. Kuiper. Specifying deadlines with dense time using deontic and temporal logic. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 3(2):67-86, 1998. Google Scholar
  6. Guido Governatori, Joris Hulstijn, Régis Riveret, and Antonino Rotolo. Characterising deadlines in temporal modal defeasible logic. In Proceedings of the 20th Australian joint conference on Advances in artificial intelligence, pages 486-496. Springer-Verlag, 2007. Google Scholar
  7. Koen V. Hindriks and M. Birna van Riemsdijk. A real-time semantics for norms with deadlines. In Proceedings of the twelfth international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS'13), pages 507-514. IFAAMAS, 2013. Google Scholar
  8. Alex Kayal, Willem-Paul Brinkman, Hanna Zoon, Mark A. Neerincx, and M. Birna van Riemsdijk. A value-sensitive mobile social application for families and children. In Posters, Demos, Late-breaking Results and Workshop Proceedings of the 22nd Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation, and Personalization (UMAP'14), volume 1181. CEUR, 2014. Google Scholar
  9. Thomas Kleinberger, Andreas Jedlitschka, Holger Storf, Silke Steinbach-Nordmann, and Stephan Prueckner. An approach to and evaluations of assisted living systems using ambient intelligence for emergency monitoring and prevention. In Constantine Stephanidis, editor, Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Intelligent and Ubiquitous Interaction Environments, pages 199-208, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Google Scholar
  10. Malte S. Kließ and M. Birna van Riemsdijk. Requirements for a temporal logic of daily activities for supportive technology. In Matteo Baldoni, Cristina Baroglio, and Roberto Micalizio, editors, Proceedings of the First Workshop on Computational Accountability and Responsibility in Multiagent Systems co-located with 20th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems, CARe-MAS@PRIMA 2017, Nice, France, October 31st, 2017., volume 2051 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings, pages 43-51. CEUR-WS.org, 2017. URL: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2051/paper4.pdf.
  11. Óscar D. Lara and Miguel A. Labrador. A survey on human activity recognition using wearable sensors. IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials, 15(3):1192-1209, 2013. Google Scholar
  12. T. Magherini, A. Fantechi, C. D. Nugent, and E. Vicario. Using temporal logic and model checking in automated recognition of human activities for ambient-assisted living. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, 43(6):509-521, Nov 2013. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.2013.2283661.
  13. Ehsan Nazerfard, Parisa Rashidi, and Diane J. Cook. Using association rule mining to discover temporal relations of daily activities. In Bessam Abdulrazak, Sylvain Giroux, Bruno Bouchard, Hélène Pigot, and Mounir Mokhtari, editors, Toward Useful Services for Elderly and People with Disabilities, pages 49-56, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Google Scholar
  14. Isabel Nunes, Jose Luiz Fiadeiro, and Wladyslaw M. Turski. A modal logic of durative actions. In Howard Barringer, Michael Fisher, Dov Gabbay, and Graham Gough, editors, Advances in Temporal Logic, pages 299-317. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 2000. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9586-5_15.
  15. Harri Oinas-Kukkonen. Behavior change support systems: A research model and agenda. In Thomas Ploug, Per Hasle, and Harri Oinas-Kukkonen, editors, Persuasive Technology: 5th International Conference, PERSUASIVE 2010, Copenhagen, Denmark, June 7-10, 2010. Proceedings, pages 4-14. Springer, 2010. Google Scholar
  16. Pietro Pasotti, M. Birna van Riemsdijk, and Catholijn M. Jonker. Representing human habits: towards a habit support agent. In Proceedings of the 10th International workshop on Normative Multiagent Systems (NorMAS'16), LNCS. Springer, 2016. To appear. Google Scholar
  17. M. Ros, M.P. Cuéllar, M. Delgado, and A. Vila. Online recognition of human activities and adaptation to habit changes by means of learning automata and fuzzy temporal windows. Information Sciences, 220:86-101, 2013. Online Fuzzy Machine Learning and Data Mining. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2011.10.005.
  18. Leila S. Shafti, Pablo Alfonso Haya, Manuel García-Herranz, and Xavier Alamán. Personal ambient intelligent reminder for people with cognitive disabilities. In José Bravo, Ramón Hervás, and Marcela Rodríguez, editors, Ambient Assisted Living and Home Care, pages 383-390, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2012. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Google Scholar
  19. John Thangarajah, James Harland, David Morley, and Neil Yorke-Smith. Operational behaviour for executing, suspending, and aborting goals in bdi agent systems. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Declarative Agent Languages and Technologies VIII, DALT'10, pages 1-21, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011. Springer-Verlag. URL: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1996758.1996760.
  20. John Thangarajah, Lin Padgham, and Michael Winikoff. Detecting &exploiting positive goal interaction in intelligent agents. In Proceedings of the Second International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, AAMAS '03, pages 401-408, New York, NY, USA, 2003. ACM. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/860575.860640.
  21. M. Birna van Riemsdijk, Louise Dennis, Michael Fisher, and Koen V. Hindriks. Agent reasoning for norm compliance: a semantic approach. In Proceedings of the twelfth international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS'13), pages 499-506. IFAAMAS, 2013. Google Scholar
  22. M. Birna van Riemsdijk, Louise Dennis, Michael Fisher, and Koen V. Hindriks. A semantic framework for socially adaptive agents: Towards strong norm compliance. In Proceedings of the fourteenth international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS'15). IFAAMAS, 2015. Google Scholar
  23. M. Birna van Riemsdijk, Catholijn M. Jonker, and Victor Lesser. Creating socially adaptive electronic partners: Interaction, reasoning and ethical challenges. In Proceedings of the fourteenth international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS'15), pages 1201-1206. IFAAMAS, 2015. Google Scholar
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2024 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH Imprint Privacy Contact