<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>A Sliding Window Filter for Time Series Streams</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Gordon Lesti</string-name>
          <email>gordon.lesti@campus.tu-berlin.de</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Stephan Spiegel</string-name>
          <email>tep@zurich.ibm.com</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>IBM Research Zurich</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Saumerstrasse 4 , 8803 Ruschlikon</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="CH">Switzerland</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>Technische Universitat Berlin</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Stra e des 17. Juni 135, 10623 Berlin</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="DE">Germany</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>The ever increasing number of sensor-equipped devices comes along with a growing need for data analysis techniques that are able to process time series streams in an online fashion. Although many sensorequipped devices produce never-ending data streams, most real-world applications merely require high-level information about the presence or absence of certain events that correspond to temporal patterns. Since online event detection is usually computational demanding, we propose a sliding window lter that decreases the time/space complexity and, therefore, allows edge computing on devices with only few resources. Our evaluation for online gesture recognition shows that the developed ltering approach does not only reduce the number of expensive dissimilarity comparison, but also maintains high precision.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>Internet of Things</kwd>
        <kwd>Time Series Streams</kwd>
        <kwd>Sliding Window Technique</kwd>
        <kwd>Online Event Detection</kwd>
        <kwd>Computational Complexity</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>As time goes by things change, and those who understand change can adapt
accordingly. This basic principle is also re ected in today's digital society, where
sensor-equipped devices measure our environment and online algorithms process
the generated data streams in quasi real-time to inform humans or cognitive
systems about relevant trends and events that impact decision making.</p>
      <p>
        Depending on the domain researchers either speak about events, patterns,
or scenes that they aim to detect or recognize in time series, sensor, or data
streams. Applications range from event detection for smart home control [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17">17</xref>
        ]
over frequent pattern mining for engine optimization [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>
        ] to scene detection for
video content [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ] and gesture recognition for human-computer interaction [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        Commonly online algorithms for data streams employ the popular sliding
window technique [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>
        ], which observes the most recent sensor measurements and
moves along the time axis as new measurements arrive. Usually each window is
examined for a set of prede ned events, which requires the comparison of the
current time series segment and all preliminary learned instances of the relevant
temporal patterns. In general, the pairwise dissimilarity comparisons of temporal
patterns are performed by time series distance measures [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">18</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        The time and space complexity of the sliding window technique increases
with decreasing step size as well as growing window size, measurement frequency,
and number of preliminary learned instances. High computational demand and
memory usage is especially problematic for embedded systems with only few
resources [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref19 ref9">9,19</xref>
        ], which applies to the greatest part of sensor-equipped devices
within the typical Internet of Things (IoT) scenario.
      </p>
      <p>
        Our aim is to reduce the number of computational expensive dissimilarity
comparisons that are required by the sliding window technique. To this end
we propose a sliding window lter [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
        ], which is able to decide whether the
current window should be passed to a time series classi er or not. Although the
lter could be considered as a binary classi er itself, it merely employs statistical
measures with linear complexity and, thereby, avoids using computationally more
expensive dissimilarity comparisons in many cases. Our approach to mitigate
the computational complexity of event detection in data streams is di erent
from other techniques in that we refrain from accelerating time series distance
measures [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13 ref15">13,15</xref>
        ] or reducing dataset numerosity [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref20">20</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        We demonstrate the practical use of our proposed sliding window lter for
gesture recognition in continuous streams of accelleration data [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10 ref11">10,11</xref>
        ], where a
great amount of the necessary but expensive Dynamic Time Warping (DTW)
distance calculations [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
        ] is replaced by less demanding statistical measures, such
as the complexity estimate [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ] or sample variance [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
        ]. Our experimental results
show that the number of DTW distance calculations can be cut in half, while
still maintaining the same high gesture recognition performance.
      </p>
      <p>The rest of the paper is structured as follows. Chapter 2 introduces
background and notation. Chapter 3 and 4 introduce and evaluate our proposed
sliding window lter. We conclude with future work in Chapter 5.
2</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>Background and Notation</title>
      <p>
        This section gives more background on the sliding window technique [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>
        ], DTW
distance measure [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
        ], and time series normalization [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ], which are fundamental
building blocks of our conducted online gesture recognition study [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
        ]. Table 1
introduces the notation that we use for formal problem description.
Symbol Description
      </p>
      <p>Q a time series of size n with Q = (q1; q2; : : : ; qi; : : : ; qn)
Q[i; j] a subsequence time series of Q with Q[i; j] = (qi; qi+1; : : : ; qj)
t the current time
the mean of a time series Q
the standard deviation of a time series Q
, z two di erent time series normalizations
Given a continuous time series stream Q, the sliding window technique examines
the w most recent data points and moves s steps along the time axis as new
measurements arrive, where w and s are referred to as window and step size.
This technique has the advantage that it does not need to store the never-ending
stream of data, but it also implies that measurements can only be considered for
further data analysis as long as they are located within the current window.</p>
      <p>
        In most applications, each window is passed to a data processing unit, which
performs some kind of time series classi cation, clustering, or anomaly detection.
For example in online gesture recognition [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
        ], one can employ a nearest neighbor
classi er, which compares each window to a training set of preliminary learned
time series instances. In case that the current window Q[t w; t] is similar to one
of the known gestures, where similar means that the time series distance falls
below a certain threshold, a corresponding action can be triggered. A popular
distance measure for gestures [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
        ] and other warped time series is described in
the following subsection.
2.2
      </p>
      <sec id="sec-2-1">
        <title>Dynamic Time Warping</title>
        <p>
          Dynamic Time Warping (DTW) is a widely used and robust distance measure
for time series, allowing similar shapes to match even if they are out of phase
in the time axis [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
          ]. Traditionally DTW computes a full distance matrix to nd
an optimal warping path, where possible nonlinear alignments between a pair
of time series include matches of early time points of the rst sequence with
late time points of the second sequence. To prevent pathological alignments, the
size of the warping window can be constraint, for instance, by the Sakoe-Chiba
band [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>
          ] or the Itakura parallelogram [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
          ]. Figure 1 illustrates the DTW distance
measure using a Sakoe-Chiba band of 10%, where the percentage of the warping
window refers to the length of the compared time series.
        </p>
        <p>20
n
ito 40
a
r
lcee 60
c
a
80
0
10
20
time
30
40</p>
        <p>C
Q
50
40
30
20
10
0
Fig. 1. Time series Q and C compared by DTW with a Sakoe-Chiba band of 10%
time series length. The left plot illustrates the nonlinear alignment between the two
sequences and the right plot shows the optimal warping path within the speci ed band.
2.3</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-2-2">
        <title>Time Series Normalization</title>
        <p>
          Literature on time series mining [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18 ref5">5,18</xref>
          ] suggests to normalize all (sub-)sequences
before measuring their pair-wise dissimilarity by means of a distance measure.
There are multiple ways to normalize time series, where two common techniques
[
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
          ] are compared in this study.
        </p>
        <p>Given is a time series Q = (q1; : : : ; qn) of length n, we can compute its mean
and standard deviation as followed:</p>
        <p>n
= 1 X q
n
i=1
i</p>
        <p>n
= 1 X(qi
n
i=1
This section does not only explain the concept of our proposed ltering approach,
but also describes how to integrate our lter into the well-known and widely-used
sliding window technique, as shown in Figure 2.</p>
        <p>In general, the sliding window lter considers the most recent measurements
in a data stream. The considered measurements are usually passed to a classi er,
which aims at categorizing the current time series subsequence. In case that the
current subsequence was assigned to a known category or class, a corresponding
action is triggered and the next non-overlapping window, w steps along the time
axis, is examined. If the current subsequence just contains noise and no category
was assigned, the next overlapping window, s steps along the arrow of time, is
processed. The main limitation of this traditional sliding window technique is its
computational complexity, which increases with growing window size, shrinking
step size, higher sample rate, and larger training set.</p>
        <p>For instance, given a data stream of length l=10090, a window size of w=100,
and a step size of s=10, we need to classify (l (w s))=s = 1000 windows.
Moreover, assuming 20 training time series, classifying 1000 windows by means
of the nearest neighbor approach requires exactly 20 1000 = 20K dissimilarity
comparisons. In case that we employ unconstrained DTW as time series distance
measure, we need to compute 20K full warping matrices, each of them containing
w w = 10K cells, resulting in a total amount of 200M distance operations.
sensors
or devices</p>
        <p>Continuous time
series stream Q</p>
        <p>Extract last
subsequence Q[t w; t]
from Q
of size w,
Q[t w; t]</p>
        <p>Time
series lter</p>
        <p>no
Sleep for
s time
yes
no</p>
        <p>Time series
classi cator
Q[t w; t]
classi able?</p>
        <p>yes
Trigger event that Q[t
w; t] has been classi ed
and sleep for w time</p>
        <p>
          In order to reduce the large number of computational expensive dissimilarity
comparisons, we propose to employ a sliding window lter, which is capable of
separating signal from noise, only passing promising time series subsequences
to the classi er. In that sense, the proposed lter can also be considered as a
binary classi er, which prunes windows that are likely to be noise and forwards
subsequences that exhibit similar features as the training time series. Extracting
characteristic time series features that can be used as a lter criterion should
ideally exhibit linear complexity, because we aim at replacing more expensive
dissimilarity comparisons. Suitable lter candidates include statistical measures,
such as the sample variance [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
          ] and length normalized complexity estimate [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
          ],
explained in more detail below.
        </p>
        <p>Given is a time series Q = (q1; : : : ; qn) with length n, we can de ne the
sample variance (V AR) and length normalized complexity estimate (LN CE) as
follows:</p>
        <p>LN CE(Q) =</p>
        <p>n
V AR(Q) = 1 X(qi</p>
        <p>n
n
1
i=1
vun 1
u2X(qi
1 t
i=1
)2
qi+1)2</p>
        <p>Having de ned the above statistical measures, we are able to compute the
V AR and LN CE for all training time series and, subsequently, use the resulting
range of statistical values to learn an appropriate lter interval. During testing,
each window that exhibits a measured value within the learned interval is passed
to the classi er or pruned otherwise. In order to avoid excessive pruning of
relevant windows, we further more introduce a multiplication factor, which allows
us to expend the interval boundaries by a certain percentage.</p>
        <p>In general, we aim at designing a lter with high precision and recall. In our
case, precision is the ratio between the number of relevant windows that were
passed to the classi er (true positives) and the number of all windows that were
passed to the classi er (true positives and false positives). Consequently, recall
is the ratio between the number of relevant windows that were passed to the
classi er (true positives) and the number of all relevant windows (true positives
and false negatives). An exhaustive evaluation of our proposed sliding window
lter in dependence of all model parameters is presented in the next section.
4</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Evaluation</title>
      <p>This chapter describes the data aggregation in Section 4.1, data preparation in
Section 4.2, experimental setup in Section Section 4.3, and used performance
measures in Section 4.4, before presenting our results in Section 4.5.
4.1</p>
      <sec id="sec-3-1">
        <title>Data Aggregation</title>
        <p>
          We employed a Wii RemoteTM Plus controller to record di erent gestures for
multiple users. Each user performed 8 gestures, rst in a controlled environment
to record clean training samples and afterwards in noisy environment to record
a test time series stream, which includes all predetermined gestures as well as
acceleration data that corresponds to other physical activities. All records are
available for download on our project website [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
          ]. A sample record containing
both training and test gestures is illustrated in Figure 3.
All of our data records are resampled and quantized before further analysis. In
general, dimensionality and cardinality reduction of time series is performed to
ease and accelerate data processing by providing a more compact representation
of equidistant measurements [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
          ].
        </p>
        <p>
          Resampling: The recorded acceleration data was resampled by means of the
moving average technique, using a window size of 50 ms and step size of 30 ms.
Quantization: The resampled records were then converted into time series with
integer values between -16 and 16, such as suggested in related work [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
          ] and
summarized in table 2.
The proposed sliding window lter has several model parameters that need to
be carefully tuned in order to achieve optimal performance. Depending on the
application domain we need to select an appropriate window and step size, time
series normalization, dissimilarity threshold, and lter criterion. In the following
we describe all parameter settings that were assessed in our empirical study:
{ The window size determines the number of most recent measurements
contained in the examined time series subsequences. We tested four di erent
sizes that were learned from the training gesture, including min, max, and
avg length as well as the mid-point of the range.
{ The step size de nes the gap between consecutive time series windows. As
default setting we use one tenth of the window size.
{ For online gesture recognition we employ the nearest neighbor classi er in
combination with the DTW distance, where we evaluate 34 di erent
SakoeChiba band sizes, ranging from 1 % to 100 %. Prior to pair-wise comparing
sliding windows and training gestures, the corresponding time series should
be normalized. We evaluate , z, and no normalization.
{ The dissimilarity threshold de nes the time series distance at which a
sliding window and a training gesture are considered to belong to the same
class. We determine the threshold for an individual class by measuring the
distances between all samples of that particular class and all instances of
other classes. In our empirical study we evaluate the threshold in uence for:
(i) one half of the minimum distance - HMinD, (ii) one half of the
average distance - HAvgD, and (iii) one half of the midpoint distance - HMidD.
{ The lter criterion is an essential part of our proposed approach. In our
empirical study we evaluate the performance of the two lter criteria, namely
the sample variance VAR and the length normalized complexity estimate
LNCE of a time series. Both lters are tested with di erent factors that
increase the size of the lter interval from 100 % to 300 %.
Fig. 4. Visualized results of online gesture recognition for a sample time series stream.
We highlight true positives in green, false positives in red, false negatives in blue, and
true negatives in transparent. Although we see short false detection intervals before or
after true positives, seven out of eight gestures were assigned to the correct class label.
Since our proposed sliding window lter is tested on time series streams that
contain various di erent gestures, we need to treat the described online gesture
recognition challenge as multi-class problem. Common performance measures for
multi-class problems are P recision , Recall and F score [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">14</xref>
          ]:
F score = ( 2 + 1)P recision Recall
2P recision + Recall
where is usually set to one and l denotes the number of classes that require
separate computation of true positives (tp), false positives (f p), and false
negatives (f n). These multi-class performance measures allow us to compare and
rank the results for di erent parameter settings. For our evaluation we employ
the F1score , which weights P recision and Recall equally.
4.5
        </p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-2">
        <title>Results</title>
        <p>In order to evaluate the in uence of all model parameters that were described
in Section 4.3, we performed a total number of 28152 experiments. Figure 5(a)
illustrates the P recision and Recall values for all test runs. A top performance
of around 0.7384 F1score was achieved by parameter con gurations that used
time series normalization, DTW with a Sakoe-Chiba band of about 18 % time
series length, mid window size, and HAvgD for threshold determination.</p>
        <p>Given the best parameter con guration, we investigated the in uence of the
individual parameters by changing only one at a time and xing the others, see
Figure 5(b,c,d). As shown in Figure 5(e), we also evaluated the performance
with V AR, LN CE, and no lter. The best results for each individual gesture
is shown in Figure Figure 5(f). Further tests on the applicability of the sliding
window lter as well as our interpretation of the results are presented below.</p>
        <p>Normalization: The in uence of the time series normalization is illustrated in
Figure 5(b). We compare , z, and no normalization, with mid window size and
HAvgD dissimilarity threshold. The best F1score was achieved by means of the
normalization, which corresponds to the data points shown in the magnifying
glass. The point cloud in the lower left corner of plot 5(b) are parameter settings
with rather small warping band.</p>
        <p>Warping Band: The in uence of the Sakoe-Chiba band in combination with the
DTW distance is shown below in Figure 6. For this experiment we selected only
the dominating parameter settings, with normalization, mid window size, and
and HAvgD dissimilarity threshold. The best F1score was achieved with a band
with of 18 % time series length.</p>
        <p>Dissimilarity Threshold: We evaluate three di erent ways of determining a
dissimilarity threshold, namely HMinD, HAvgD, and HMidD. For our comparison
in Figure 5(c), we used normalization, mid window size, and a warping band
of 18 % time series length. The best F1score was achieved by means of HAvgD,
shortly followed by the HMidD approach. Comparatively high P recision values
were given by HMinD threshold.</p>
        <p>Window Size: The in uence of the window size determination approach is shown
in Figure 5(d). We compare min, max, avg, and mid window size, with
normalization, HAvgD dissimilarity threshold, and a warping and of 18 % time series
length. The highest P recision , Recall and F1score was achieved by the mid
window size, shortly followed by the avg window size. Figure 5(d) furthermore
suggests to refrain from using max and min window size determination.</p>
        <p>Filtering Approach: Given the optimal parameter setting that was determined in
the previous experiments, we are now in the position to assess the in uence of the
ltering approach. Figure 5(e) shows the performance with V AR, LN CE, and no
lter. Twenty simulations are reaching a F1score value greater or equal to 0.7.</p>
        <p>Interestingly, top performance was achieved with and without lter. This lead
is to the question of computational complexity, which is answered in following
paragraph.</p>
        <p>DientdeorwmiSniazteioDnetermination
Filter Mecea asure
ll
R0:4
:06:4</p>
        <p>20 40 60 80 100
band size in % depending on input time series
Filter Interval: The lter interval does not only in uence the resulting F1score ,
but also the amount of time series dissimilarity comparisons. Figure 7 illustrates
the in uence of the interval size in respect to performance and computational
demand. With an appropriate lter interval of about 200 % we are able to
reduce the number of dissimilarity comparisons by one half, while still achieving
relatively high performance values.</p>
        <p>Individual Gestures Finally, we have tested the performance for each of the
examined gestures separately. Figure 5(e) shows the best P recision and Recall
values that were achieved for each gesture. The results demonstrate that some
gestures are easier to recognize than others.
5</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>Conclusion and Future Work</title>
      <p>In this work we have proposed a novel sliding window lter for more e cient
event detection in time series streams, which replaces computational expensive
dissimilarity comparisons by less demanding statistical measures. Furthermore,
we have demonstrated that the developed lter is able to recognize gestures in
continuous streams of acceleration data with high accuracy, while cutting the
number of distance calculations in half.</p>
      <p>Possible applications do not only include event detection on mobile device
with few hardware resources, but also distributed sensor networks with limited
bandwidth that communicate high level information instead of transferring raw
data. In future work we plan to investigate a larger variety of statistical measures
that exhibit favorable ltering properties for online gesture recognition as well
as data streams found in other domains.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
            <surname>Acar</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Spiegel</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Albayrak</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>MediaEval 2011 A ect Task: Violent Scene Detection combining audio and visual Features with SVM</article-title>
          .
          <source>CEUR Workshop</source>
          ,
          <year>2011</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
            <surname>Batista</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>X.</given-names>
            <surname>Wang</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>E. J.</given-names>
            <surname>Keogh</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>A complexity-invariant distance measure for time series</article-title>
          . ICDM,
          <year>2011</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          3.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>T. F.</given-names>
            <surname>Chan</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>G. H.</given-names>
            <surname>Golub</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>R. J.</given-names>
            <surname>LeVeque</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Algorithms for computing the sample variance: Analysis and recommendations</article-title>
          .
          <source>The American Statistician</source>
          ,
          <year>1983</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4.
          <string-name>
            <surname>G. Das</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>K.-I. Lin</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mannila</surname>
            , G. Renganathan, and
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Smyth</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Rule Discovery from Time Series</article-title>
          . KDD,
          <year>1998</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          5.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
            <surname>Ding</surname>
          </string-name>
          , G. Trajcevski,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
            <surname>Scheuermann</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>X.</given-names>
            <surname>Wang</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
            <surname>Keogh</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Querying and mining of time series data: experimental comparison of representations and distance measures</article-title>
          .
          <source>VLDB Endowment</source>
          ,
          <year>2008</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          6.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
            <surname>Itakura</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Minimum prediction residual principle applied to speech recognition</article-title>
          .
          <source>IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing</source>
          ,
          <year>1975</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          7.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
            <surname>Keogh</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Exact indexing of dynamic time warping</article-title>
          .
          <source>VLDB Endowment</source>
          ,
          <year>2002</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          8.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
            <surname>Keogh</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Chu</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
            <surname>Hart</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Pazzani</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Segmenting time series: A survey and novel approach</article-title>
          .
          <source>Data mining in Time Series Databases</source>
          ,
          <year>2004</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          9.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Kratz</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Rohs</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
            <surname>Wolf</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Mueller</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Wilhelm</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
            <surname>Johansson</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Tholander</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Laaksolahti</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Body, movement, gesture and tactility in interaction with mobile devices</article-title>
          .
          <source>MobileHCI</source>
          ,
          <year>2011</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          10. G. Lesti and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Spiegel</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>The sliding window lter for time series streams website</article-title>
          . https://gordonlesti.com
          <article-title>/a-sliding-window- lter-for-time-series-streams/</article-title>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          11.
          <string-name>
            <surname>J. Liu</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Zhong</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Wickramasuriya</surname>
            , and
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Vasudevan</surname>
          </string-name>
          . uWave:
          <article-title>Accelerometerbased personalized gesture recognition and its applications</article-title>
          .
          <source>PerCom</source>
          ,
          <year>2009</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          12.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
            <surname>Sakoe</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Chiba</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Dynamic programming algorithm optimization for spoken word recognition</article-title>
          .
          <source>Transactions on acoustics, speech, and signal processing</source>
          ,
          <year>1978</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          13.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
            <surname>Sart</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Mueen</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>W.</given-names>
            <surname>Najjar</surname>
          </string-name>
          , E. Keogh, and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
            <surname>Niennattrakul</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Accelerating dynamic time warping subsequence search with GPUs and FPGAs</article-title>
          . ICDM,
          <year>2010</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          14.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Sokolova</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
            <surname>Lapalme</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>A systematic analysis of performance measures for classi cation tasks</article-title>
          .
          <source>Information Processing and Management</source>
          ,
          <year>2009</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          15.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Spiegel</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>B.-J.</given-names>
            <surname>Jain</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Albayrak</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Fast time series classi cation under lucky time warping distance</article-title>
          .
          <source>SAC</source>
          ,
          <year>2014</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation>
          16.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Spiegel</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Discovery of driving behavior patterns</article-title>
          .
          <source>Smart Information Systems - Advances in Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition</source>
          ,
          <year>2015</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref17">
        <mixed-citation>
          17.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Spiegel</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Optimization of in-house energy demand</article-title>
          .
          <source>Smart Information Systems - Advances in Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition</source>
          ,
          <year>2015</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref18">
        <mixed-citation>
          18.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Spiegel</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Time series distance measures: segmentation, classi cation and clustering of temporal data</article-title>
          .
          <source>TU Berlin</source>
          ,
          <year>2015</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref19">
        <mixed-citation>
          19.
          <string-name>
            <surname>M. Wilhelm</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Krakowczyk</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Trollmann</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Albayrak</surname>
          </string-name>
          . eRing:
          <article-title>Multiple Finger Gesture Recognition with one Ring Using an Electric Field</article-title>
          . iWOAR,
          <year>2015</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref20">
        <mixed-citation>
          20.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>X.</given-names>
            <surname>Xi</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
            <surname>Keogh</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
            <surname>Shelton</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
            <surname>Wei</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>C. A.</given-names>
            <surname>Ratanamahatana</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Fast time series classi cation using numerosity reduction</article-title>
          . ICML,
          <year>2006</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>