skip to main content
research-article

Human Data Model: Improving Programmability of Health and Well-Being Data for Enhanced Perception and Interaction

Published:30 September 2020Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Today, an increasing number of systems produce, process, and store personal and intimate data. Such data has plenty of potential for entirely new types of software applications, as well as for improving old applications, particularly in the domain of smart healthcare. However, utilizing this data, especially when it is continuously generated by sensors and other devices, with the current approaches is complex—data is often using proprietary formats and storage, and mixing and matching data of different origin is not easy. Furthermore, many of the systems are such that they should stimulate interactions with humans, which further complicates the systems. In this article, we introduce the Human Data Model—a new tool and a programming model for programmers and end users with scripting skills that help combine data from various sources, perform computations, and develop and schedule computer-human interactions. Written in JavaScript, the software implementing the model can be run on almost any computer either inside the browser or using Node.js. Its source code can be freely downloaded from GitHub, and the implementation can be used with the existing IoT platforms. As a whole, the work is inspired by several interviews with professionals, and an online survey among healthcare and education professionals, where the results show that the interviewed subjects almost entirely lack ideas on how to benefit the ever-increasing amount of data measured of the humans. We believe that this is because of the missing support for programming models for accessing and handling the data, which can be satisfied with the Human Data Model.

References

  1. A. Solanas, C. Patsakis, M. Conti, I. S. Vlachos, V. Ramos, F. Falcone, O. Postolache, et al. 2014. Smart health: A context-aware health paradigm within smart cities. IEEE Communications Magazine 52, 8 (Aug. 2014), 74--81. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MCOM.2014.6871673Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. G. D. Abowd. 2016. Beyond Weiser: From ubiquitous to collective computing. Computer 49, 1 (Jan. 2016), 17--23. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MC.2016.22Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Kim Mens, Rafael Capilla, Nicolás Cardozo, and Bruno Dumas. 2016. A taxonomy of context-aware software variability approaches. In Companion Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Modularity (MODULARITY Companion’16). ACM, New York, NY, 119--124. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2892664.2892684Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Miguel Á. Conde and Ángel Hernández-García. 2019. Data driven education in personal learning environments—What about learning beyond the institution? International Journal of Learning Analytics and Artificial Intelligence for Education 1, 1 (2019), 43--57.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Rolf Reber, Elizabeth A. Canning, and Judith M. Harackiewicz. 2018. Personalized education to increase interest. Current Directions in Psychological Science 27, 6 (2018), 449--454.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Antero Taivalsaari and Tommi Mikkonen. 2017. A roadmap to the programmable world: Software challenges in the IoT era. IEEE Software 34, 1 (2017), 72--80.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. W. Shi and S. Dustdar. 2016. The promise of Edge computing. Computer 49, 5 (May 2016), 78--81. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MC.2016.145Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. A. V. Dastjerdi and R. Buyya. 2016. Fog computing: Helping the Internet of Things realize its potential. Computer 49, 8 (Aug. 2016), 112--116. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MC.2016.245Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Bill Wasik. 2013. In the programmable world, all our objects will act as one. Wired. Retrieved August 14, 2019 from http://www.wired.com/2013/05/internet-of-things-2/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Polar AccessLink API. n.d. Home Page. Retrieved August 14, 2019 from https://www.polar.com/accesslink-api/?shellpolar-accesslink-api.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Suunto. n.d. Suunto APIs. Retrieved August 14, 2019 from https://apizone.suunto.com/docs/services/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Garmin. n.d. Garmin APIs. Retrieved August 14, 2019 from https://developer.garmin.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. FitBot. n.d. FitBod Developers’ Guide. Retrieved August 14, 2019 from https://dev.fitbit.com/build/guides/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Developers. n.d. Wear OK Guide. Retrieved August 14, 2019 from https://developer.android.com/training/wearables/apps/creating.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Google. n.d. Google Fit APIs. Retrieved August 14, 2019 from https://developers.google.com/fit/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. João Santos, Joel J. P. C. Rodrigues, Bruno M. C. Silva, João Casal, Kashif Saleem, and Victor Denisov. 2016. An IoT-based mobile gateway for intelligent personal assistants on mobile health environments. Journal of Network and Computer Applications 71 (2016), 194--204.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Sandro Pinto, Jorge Cabral, and T. Gomes. 2017. We-care: An IoT-based health care system for elderly people. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology (ICIT’17). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 1378--1383.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Luca Mainetti, Luigi Patrono, Andrea Secco, and Ilaria Sergi. 2016. An IoT-aware AAL system for elderly people. In Proceedings of the International Multidisciplinary Conference on Computer and Energy Science (SpliTech’16). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Amir-Mohammad Rahmani, Nanda Kumar Thanigaivelan, Tuan Nguyen Gia, Jose Granados, Behailu Negash, Pasi Liljeberg, and Hannu Tenhunen. 2015. Smart e-Health Gateway: Bringing intelligence to Internet-of-Things based ubiquitous healthcare systems. In Proceedings of the 2015 12th Annual IEEE Consumer Communications and Networking Conference (CCNC’15). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 826--834.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Danan Thilakanathan, Shiping Chen, Surya Nepal, Rafael Calvo, and Leila Alem. 2014. A platform for secure monitoring and sharing of generic health data in the Cloud. Future Generation Computer Systems 35, Supplement C (2014), 102--113. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2013.09.011Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Jong Hyun Lim, Andong Zhan, Evan Goldschmidt, JeongGil Ko, Marcus Chang, and Andreas Terzis. 2012. HealthOS: A platform for pervasive health applications. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Workshop on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services for HealthCare (mHealthSys’12). ACM, New York, NY, Article 4, 6 pages. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2396276.2396281Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. M. Mazhar Rathore, Anand Paul, Awais Ahmad, Marco Anisetti, and Gwanggil Jeon. 2017. Hadoop-based Intelligent Care System (HICS): Analytical approach for Big Data in IoT. ACM Transactions on Internet Technology 18, 1 (Nov. 2017), Article 8, 24 pages. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3108936Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Gianpaolo Cugola and Alessandro Margara. 2012. Processing flows of information: From data stream to complex event processing. ACM Computing Surveys 44, 3 (2012), Article 15, 62 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Ching Yu Chen, Jui Hsi Fu, Today Sung, Ping-Feng Wang, Emery Jou, and Ming-Whei Feng. 2014. Complex event processing for the Internet of Things and its applications. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE’14). 1144--1149. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/CoASE.2014.6899470Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Denzil Ferreira, Vassilis Kostakos, and Anind K. Dey. 2015. AWARE: Mobile context instrumentation framework. Frontiers in ICT 2 (2015), 6.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Syed Monowar Hossain, Timothy Hnat, Nazir Saleheen, Nusrat Jahan Nasrin, Joseph Noor, Bo-Jhang Ho, Tyson Condie, Mani Srivastava, and Santosh Kumar. 2017. mCerebrum: A mobile sensing software platform for development and validation of digital biomarkers and interventions. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM Conference on Embedded Network Sensor Systems. ACM, New York, NY, 7.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Apache. 2011. Storm, Distributed and Fault-Tolerant Realtime Computation. Retrieved September 6, 2020 from https://storm.apache.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Apache. 2014. Apache Spark. Retrieved September 6, 2020 from https://spark.apache.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Manoj K. Garg, Duk-Jin Kim, Deepak S. Turaga, and Balakrishnan Prabhakaran. 2010. Multimodal analysis of body sensor network data streams for real-time healthcare. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Multimedia Information Retrieval (MIR’10). ACM, New York, NY, 469--478. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1743384.1743467Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. David Bermbach, Frank Pallas, David García Pérez, Pierluigi Plebani, Maya Anderson, Ronen Kat, and Stefan Tai. 2017. A research perspective on Fog computing. In Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on IoT Systems Provisioning and Management for Context-Aware Smart Cities.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Flavio Bonomi, Rodolfo Milito, Jiang Zhu, and Sateesh Addepalli. 2012. Fog computing and its role in the Internet of Things. In Proceedings of the 1st Edition of the MCC Workshop on Mobile Cloud Computing. ACM, New York, NY, 13--16.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Eemil Lagerspetz, Jonatan Hamberg, Xin Li, Huber Flores, Petteri Nurmi, Nigel Davies, and Sumi Helal. 2019. Pervasive data science on the Edge. IEEE Pervasive Computing 18, 3 (2019), 40--48.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Apache. n.d. Home Page. Retrieved August 9, 2019 from https://kafka.apache.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. David C. Luckham and Brian Frasca. 1998. Complex event processing in distributed systems. Computer Systems Laboratory Technical Report CSL-TR-98-754. Stanford University, Stanford 28 (1998), 16.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Timo Aaltonen, Tommi Mikkonen, Heikki Peltola, and Arto Salminen. 2014. From mashup applications to open data ecosystems. In Proceedings of The International Symposium on Open Collaboration. ACM, 15.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. J. Guillen, J. Miranda, J. Berrocal, J. Garcia-Alonso, J. M. Murillo, and C. Canal. 2014. People as a service: A mobile-centric model for providing collective sociological profiles. Software, IEEE 31, 2 (Mar 2014), 48--53. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MS.2013.140Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. James Scott, Jon Crowcroft, Pan Hui, and Christophe Diot. 2006. Haggle: A networking architecture designed around mobile users. In WONS 2006: Third Annual Conference on Wireless On-demand Network Systems and Services. 78--86.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Karim Habak, Mostafa Ammar, Khaled A Harras, and Ellen Zegura. 2015. Femto Clouds: Leveraging mobile devices to provide Cloud service at the Edge. In 2015 IEEE 8th International Conference on Cloud Computing (CLOUD). IEEE, 9--16.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Huber Flores, Rajesh Sharma, Denzil Ferreira, Vassilis Kostakos, Jukka Manner, Sasu Tarkoma, Pan Hui, and Yong Li. 2017. Social-aware hybrid mobile offloading. Pervasive and Mobile Computing 36 (2017), 25--43.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. U. Neisser. 1976. Cognition and Reality: Principles and Implications of Cognitive Psychology. W. H. Freeman.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. David Vernon. 2014. Artificial Cognitive Systems: A Primer. MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Eun Kyoung Choe, Bongshin Lee, et al. 2015. Characterizing visualization insights from quantified selfers’ personal data presentations. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 35, 4 (2015), 28--37.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. N. Mäkitalo, T. Aaltonen, M. Raatikainen, A. Ometov, S. Andreev, Y. Koucheryavy, and T. Mikkonen. 2019. Action-oriented programming model: Collective executions and interactions in the Fog. Journal of Systems and Software, in print (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Amit Sheth, Pramod Anantharam, and Cory Henson. 2013. Physical-cyber-social computing: An early 21st century approach. IEEE Intelligent Systems 28, 1 (2013), 78--82.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Amit P. Sheth. 2010. Computing for human experience: Semantics-empowered sensors, services, and social computing on the ubiquitous Web. IEEE Internet Computing 14, 1 (2010), 88--91.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Jing Zeng, Laurence T. Yang, Man Lin, Huansheng Ning, and Jianhua Ma. 2016. A survey: Cyber-physical-social systems and their system-level design methodology. Future Generation Computer Systems (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Zhong Liu, Dong-sheng Yang, Ding Wen, Wei-ming Zhang, and Wenji Mao. 2011. Cyber-physical-social systems for command and control. IEEE Intelligent Systems 26, 4 (2011), 92--96.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Fei-Yue Wang. 2010. The emergence of intelligent enterprises: From CPS to CPSS. IEEE Intelligent Systems 25, 4 (2010), 85--88.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Katrin Hänsel, Natalie Wilde, Hamed Haddadi, and Akram Alomainy. 2015. Challenges with current wearable technology in monitoring health data and providing positive behavioural support. In Proceedings of the 5th EAI International Conference on Wireless Mobile Communication and Healthcare. 158--161.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. Antonio J. Jara, Yann Bocchi, and Dominique Genoud. 2014. Social Internet of Things: The potential of the Internet of Things for defining human behaviours. In 2014 International Conference on Intelligent Networking and Collaborative Systems. IEEE, 581--585.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Henry Friday Nweke, Ying Wah Teh, Ghulam Mujtaba, and Mohammed Ali Al-Garadi. 2019. Data fusion and multiple classifier systems for human activity detection and health monitoring: Review and open research directions. Information Fusion 46 (2019), 147--170.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Niko Mäkitalo, Timo Aaltonen, and Tommi Mikkonen. 2016. Coordinating proactive social devices in a mobile Cloud: Lessons learned and a way forward. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Mobile Software Engineering and Systems (MOBILESoft’16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 179--188.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Human Data Model: Improving Programmability of Health and Well-Being Data for Enhanced Perception and Interaction

                Recommendations

                Comments

                Login options

                Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

                Sign in

                Full Access

                PDF Format

                View or Download as a PDF file.

                PDF

                eReader

                View online with eReader.

                eReader

                HTML Format

                View this article in HTML Format .

                View HTML Format
                About Cookies On This Site

                We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

                Learn more

                Got it!