Mobile In-Ear Power Sensor for Jaw Joint Activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In only a short time, in-ear wearables have gone from hearing aids to a host of electronic devices such as wireless earbuds and digital earplugs. To operate, these devices rely exclusively on batteries, which are not only cumbersome but known for several drawbacks. In this paper, the earcanal dynamic movements generated by jaw activity are evaluated as an alternative source of energy that could replace batteries. A mobile in-ear power sensor device capable of measuring jaw activity metrics is prototyped and tested on three test subjects. The test results are subsequently analyzed using a detection algorithm to detect the jaw activity based on the captured audio signals and to classify them into four main categories, namely chewing, swallowing, coughing and talking. The mean power associated with each category of activity is then calculated by using the pressure signals as measured by a water-inflated earplug subjected to earcanal dynamic movement. The results show that 3.8 mW of power, achieved mainly by the chewing movement, is readily available on average from within the earcanal.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".