BlinkRadar: Non-Intrusive Driver Eye-Blink Detection with UWB Radar
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
The eye-blink pattern is crucial for drowsy driving diagnostics, which has become an increasingly serious social issue. However, traditional methods (e.g., with EOG, camera, wearable, and acoustic sensors) are less applicable to real-life scenarios due to the disharmony between user-friendliness, monitoring accuracy, and privacy-preserving. In this work, we design and implement BlinkRadar as a low-cost and contact-free system to conduct fine-grained eye-blink monitoring in a driving situation using a customized impulse-radio ultra-wideband (IR-UWB) radar which has superior spatial resolution with the ultra-wide bandwidth. BlinkRadar leverages an IR-UWB radar to achieve contact-free sensing, and it fully exploits the complex radar signal for data augmentation. BlinkRadar aims to single out the eye-blink induced waveforms modulated by body movements and vehicle status. It solves the serious interference caused by the unique characteristics of blinking (i.e., subtle, sparse, and non-periodic) and from the human target itself and surrounding objects. We evaluate BlinkRadar in a laboratory environment and during actual road testing. Experimental results show that BlinkRadar can achieve a robust performance of drowsy driving with a median detection accuracy of 92.2% and eye blink detection of 95.5%.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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