MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889102505 · doi:10.1145/3211960.3211977

Challenges with real-world smartwatch based audio monitoring

2018· article· en· W2889102505 on OpenAlexaff
Daniyal Liaqat, Robert Wu, Andrea S. Gershon, Hisham Alshaer, Frank Rudzicz, Eyal de Lara

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory and Cough-Related Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSmartwatchComputer scienceMicrophoneSound qualitySpeech recognitionNoise (video)Context (archaeology)MultimediaAudio signal processingAudio signalSpeech codingWearable computerArtificial intelligenceTelecommunicationsEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Audio data from a microphone can be a rich source of information. The speech and audio processing community has explored using audio data to detect emotion, depression, Alzheimer's disease and even children's age, weight and height. The mobile community has looked at using smartphone based audio to detect coughing and other respiratory sounds and help predict students' GPA. However, audio data from these studies tends to be collected in more controlled environments using well placed, high quality microphones or from phone calls. Applying these kinds of analyses to continuous and in-the-wild audio could have tremendous applications, particularly in the context of health monitoring. As part of a health monitoring study, we use smartwatches to collect in-the-wild audio from real patients. In this paper we characterize the quality of the audio data we collected. Our findings include that the smartwatch based audio is good enough to discern speech and respiratory sounds. However, extracting these sounds is difficult because of the wide variety of noise in the signal and current tools perform poorly at dealing with this noise. We also find that the quality of the microphone allows annotators to differentiate the source of speech and coughing, which adds another level of complexity to analyzing this audio.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.569
Threshold uncertainty score0.736

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.095
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRespiratory and Cough-Related ResearchFrench-language works237,207