Evaluating the Measurement of Driver Heart and Breathing Rates from a Sensor-Equipped Steering Wheel using Spectrotemporal Signal Processing
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Driver's status and behaviours such as inattention, drunk driving, or sleeping while driving play important roles in approximately half of all automobile crashes. For this reason, the last decade has seen an emergence of non-intrusive driver status monitoring systems with the ultimate goal of reducing the number of such accidents. From the different number of proposed methods, the use of the physiological signals, specifically the electrocardiogram (ECG), has shown useful. The acquisition of ECG signals during driving, however, presents a challenge due to movement artifacts, such as car and driver motion, and a good contact of the sensing electrodes, e.g., embedded on the driver seat. In this paper, we evaluate the ECG signals acquired from electrodes placed on the steering wheel under three aspects: (i) quality of the acquired signals; (ii) their usability to estimate an average and an instantaneous heart rate, and (iii) their usability to estimate the driver's breathing rate via innovative spectrotemporal processing of the acquired signals. Experimental results show that ECG signals obtained from the steering wheel have quality inline with that obtained from a benchmark chest ECG device, allow for both average and instantaneous heart rate to be measured, as well as breathing rate to be extracted.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it