skip to main content
research-article

BMAR: Barometric and Motion-based Alignment and Refinement for Offline Signal Synchronization across Devices

Published:12 June 2023Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

A requirement of cross-modal signal processing is accurate signal alignment. Though simple on a single device, accurate signal synchronization becomes challenging as soon as multiple devices are involved, such as during activity monitoring, health tracking, or motion capture---particularly outside controlled scenarios where data collection must be standalone, low-power, and support long runtimes. In this paper, we present BMAR, a novel synchronization method that operates purely based on recorded signals and is thus suitable for offline processing. BMAR needs no wireless communication between devices during runtime and does not require any specific user input, action, or behavior. BMAR operates on the data from devices worn by the same person that record barometric pressure and acceleration---inexpensive, low-power, and thus commonly included sensors in today's wearable devices. In its first stage, BMAR verifies that two recordings were acquired simultaneously and pre-aligns all data traces. In a second stage, BMAR refines the alignment using acceleration measurements while accounting for clock skew between devices. In our evaluation, three to five body-worn devices recorded signals from the wearer for up to ten hours during a series of activities. BMAR synchronized all signal recordings with a median error of 33.4 ms and reliably rejected non-overlapping signal traces. The worst-case activity was sleeping, where BMAR's second stage could not exploit motion for refinement and, thus, aligned traces with a median error of 3.06 s.

References

  1. Parastoo Alinia, Chris Cain, Ramin Fallahzadeh, Armin Shahrokni, Diane Cook, and Hassan Ghasemzadeh. 2017. How Accurate Is Your Activity Tracker? A Comparative Study of Step Counts in Low-Intensity Physical Activities. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 5, 8 (Aug. 2017), e106.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Kioxia America. 2019. TH58CYG3S0HRAIJ. https://static6.arrow.com/aropdfconversion/dd02224cfed190f11368fa73736fc9a9b13d6528/th58cyg3s0hraij_datasheet_en_20191001.pdf. Last accessed: 2022--12--09.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Byeong Wan An, Jung Hwal Shin, So-Yun Kim, Joohee Kim, Sangyoon Ji, Jihun Park, Youngjin Lee, Jiuk Jang, Young-Geun Park, Eunjin Cho, Subin Jo, and Jang-Ung Park. 2017. Smart Sensor Systems for Wearable Electronic Devices. Polymers 9, 8 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3390/polym9080303Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Farzad Asgarian and Khalil Najafi. 2022. BlueSync: Time Synchronization in Bluetooth Low Energy With Energy-Efficient Calculations. IEEE Internet of Things Journal 9, 11 (2022), 8633--8645. https://doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2021.3116921Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. David Bannach, Oliver Amft, and Paul Lukowicz. 2009. Automatic Event-Based Synchronization of Multimodal Data Streams from Wearable and Ambient Sensors. In Smart Sensing and Context (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Payam Barnaghi, Klaus Moessner, Mirko Presser, and Stefan Meissner (Eds.). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 135--148. https://doi.org/10.1007/978--3--642--04471--7_11Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Rummana Bari, Md Mahbubur Rahman, Nazir Saleheen, Megan Battles Parsons, Eugene H Buder, and Santosh Kumar. 2020. Automated detection of stressful conversations using wearable physiological and inertial sensors. Proceedings of the ACM on interactive, mobile, wearable and ubiquitous technologies 4, 4 (2020), 1--23.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. André Bideaux, Bernd Zimmermann, Stefan Hey, and Wilhelm Stork. 2015. Synchronization in wireless biomedical-sensor networks with Bluetooth Low Energy. Current Directions in Biomedical Engineering 1, 1 (Sept. 2015), 73--76. https://doi.org/10.1515/cdbme-2015--0019 Publisher: De Gruyter Section: Current Directions in Biomedical Engineering.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Rajendra Singh Bisht, Sourabh Jain, and Naveen Tewari. 2021. Study of Wearable IoT devices in 2021: Analysis & Future Prospects. In 2021 2nd International Conference on Intelligent Engineering and Management (ICIEM). 577--581. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIEM51511.2021.9445334Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Richard Bloss. 2015. Wearable sensors bring new benefits to continuous medical monitoring, real time physical activity assessment, baby monitoring and industrial applications. Sensor Review 35, 2 (Jan. 2015), 141--145.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Alan Kevin Bourke, Espen Alexander F Ihlen, Ronny Bergquist, Per Bendik Wik, Beatrix Vereijken, and Jorunn L Helbostad. 2017. A Physical Activity Reference Data-Set Recorded from Older Adults Using Body-Worn Inertial Sensors and Video Technology-The ADAPT Study Data-Set. Sensors (Basel) 17, 3 (March 2017).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Elisa Bruno, Sebastian Böttcher, Pedro F. Viana, Marta Amengual-Gual, Boney Joseph, Nino Epitashvili, Matthias Dümpelmann, Martin Glasstetter, Andrea Biondi, Kristof Van Laerhoven, Tobias Loddenkemper, Mark P. Richardson, Andreas Schulze-Bonhage, and Benjamin H. Brinkmann. 2021. Wearable devices for seizure detection: Practical experiences and recommendations from the Wearables for Epilepsy And Research (WEAR) International Study Group. Epilepsia 62, 10 (2021), 2307--2321. https://doi.org/10.1111/epi.17044 arXiv:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/epi.17044Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Dario Camuffo, Chiara Bertolin, Phil D. Jones, Richard Cornes, and Emmanuel Garnier. 2010. The earliest daily barometric pressure readings in Italy: Pisa AD 1657--1658 and Modena AD 1694, and the weather over Europe. The Holocene 20, 3 (May 2010), 337--349. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959683609351900 Publisher: SAGE Publications Ltd.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Meredith A Case, Holland A Burwick, Kevin G Volpp, and Mitesh S Patel. 2015. Accuracy of Smartphone Applications and Wearable Devices for Tracking Physical Activity Data. JAMA 313, 6 (Feb. 2015), 625--626.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. A. Choi and H. Shin. 2017. Photoplethysmography sampling frequency: pilot assessment of how low can we go to analyze pulse rate variability with reliability? Physiological Measurement 38, 3 (Feb. 2017), 586. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361--6579/aa5efa Publisher: IOP Publishing.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Jordana Dahmen, Alyssa La Fleur, Gina Sprint, Diane Cook, and Douglas L. Weeks. 2017. Using wrist-worn sensors to measure and compare physical activity changes for patients undergoing rehabilitation. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PerCom Workshops). 667--672. https://doi.org/10.1109/PERCOMW.2017.7917643Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Peter H Dana and Bruce M Penrod. 1990. The role of GPS in precise time and frequency dissemination. GPS World 1, 4 (1990), 38--43.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Waltenegus Dargie. 2009. Analysis of time and frequency domain features of accelerometer measurements. In 2009 Proceedings of 18th International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks. IEEE, 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Analog Devices. 2018. ADXL355, Low Noise, Low Drift, Low Power, 3-Axis MEMS Accelerometers. https://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/adxl354_355.pdf. Last accessed: 2022--12--09.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Renesas Electronics. 2022. DA1469x. https://www.renesas.com/us/en/document/dst/da1469x-datasheet?r=1606281. Last accessed: 2022--12--09.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Jeremy Elson, Lewis Girod, and Deborah Estrin. 2002. Fine-Grained Network Time Synchronization Using Reference Broadcasts. In 5th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI 02). USENIX Association. https://www.usenix.org/conference/osdi-02/fine-grained-network-time-synchronization-using-reference-broadcastsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Saurabh Ganeriwal, Ram Kumar, and Mani B. Srivastava. 2003. Timing-sync protocol for sensor networks. In Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Embedded networked sensor systems (SenSys '03). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 138--149. https://doi.org/10.1145/958491.958508Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Yan Gao, Yang Long, Yu Guan, Anna Basu, Jessica Baggaley, and Thomas Ploetz. 2019. Towards Reliable, Automated General Movement Assessment for Perinatal Stroke Screening in Infants Using Wearable Accelerometers. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 3, 1, Article 12 (mar 2019), 22 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3314399Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Shkurta Gashi, Elena Di Lascio, and Silvia Santini. 2019. Using unobtrusive wearable sensors to measure the physiological synchrony between presenters and audience members. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 3, 1 (2019), 1--19.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Unmesh Ghoshdastider, Reinhard Viga, and Michael Kraft. 2014. Wireless time synchronization of a collaborative brain-computer-interface using bluetooth low energy. In SENSORS, 2014 IEEE. 2250--2254. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSENS.2014.6985489Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Unmesh Ghoshdastider, Reinhard Viga, and Michael Kraft. 2015. Experimental evaluation of a pairwise broadcast synchronization in a low-power Cyber-physical system. In 2015 IEEE Topical Conference on Wireless Sensors and Sensor Networks (WiSNet). 50--52. https://doi.org/10.1109/WISNET.2015.7127399Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Thomas Gilbert, Sally Day, Antonia F De C Hamilton, and Jamie Ward. 2022. A Simple Method for Synchronising Multiple IMUs using the Magnetometer. In Proceedings of the 2022 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers (ISWC '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 100--102. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544794.3558466Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Martin Gjoreski, Hristijan Gjoreski, Mitja Luštrek, and Matjaž Gams. 2016. How Accurately Can Your Wrist Device Recognize Daily Activities and Detect Falls? Sensors (Basel) 16, 6 (June 2016).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Waqas Ikram, Ivan Stoianov, and Nina F Thornhill. 2010. Towards a radio-controlled time synchronized wireless sensor network: A work in-progress paper. In 2010 IEEE 15th Conference on Emerging Technologies & Factory Automation (ETFA 2010). IEEE, 1--4.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Goertek Microelectronics Inc. 2022. SPL07-003, Digital pressure sensor. https://media.digikey.com/pdf/Data%20Sheets/Goertek%20Microelectronics%20PDFs/SPL07-003.pdf. Last accessed: 2023-02-14.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. ECS Inc International. 2021. ECX-16, 32.768 KHz SMD Tuning Fork Crystal. https://ecsxtal.com/store/pdf/ECX-16.pdf. Last accessed: 2022-12-09.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Aida Kamišalić, Iztok Fister, Muhamed Turkanović, and Sašo Karakatič. 2018. Sensors and Functionalities of Non-Invasive Wrist-Wearable Devices: A Review. Sensors 18, 6 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3390/s18061714Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Sunwook Kim and Maury A. Nussbaum. 2013. Performance evaluation of a wearable inertial motion capture system for capturing physical exposures during manual material handling tasks. Ergonomics 56, 2 (2013), 314--326. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2012.742932 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2012.742932 PMID: 23231730.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Heike Leutheuser, Dominik Schuldhaus, and Bjoern M Eskofier. 2013. Hierarchical, multi-sensor based classification of daily life activities: comparison with state-of-the-art algorithms using a benchmark dataset. PloS one 8, 10 (2013), e75196.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Zan Li, Torsten Braun, and Desislava C. Dimitrova. 2015. Methodology for GPS Synchronization Evaluation with High Accuracy. In 2015 IEEE 81st Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring). 1--6. https://doi.org/10.1109/VTCSpring.2015.7145929 ISSN: 1550--2252.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Xi Liu, Lei Liu, Steven J. Simske, and Jerry Liu. 2016. Human Daily Activity Recognition for Healthcare Using Wearable and Visual Sensing Data. In 2016 IEEE International Conference on Healthcare Informatics (ICHI). 24--31. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICHI.2016.100Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Eduardo José da S. Luz, David Menotti, and William Robson Schwartz. 2014. Evaluating the use of ECG signal in low frequencies as a biometry. Expert Systems with Applications 41, 5 (April 2014), 2309--2315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2013.09.028Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Dmytro Makara, Vladyslav Tsybul'nyk, and Taras Kurnyts'kyi. 2019. Power Efficient Clock Synchronization in Bluetooth-Based Mesh Networks. In Ambient Intelligence (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Ioannis Chatzigiannakis, Boris De Ruyter, and Irene Mavrommati (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 14--26. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-34255-5_2Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Karandeep Malhi, Subhas Chandra Mukhopadhyay, Julia Schnepper, Mathias Haefke, and Hartmut Ewald. 2012. A Zigbee-Based Wearable Physiological Parameters Monitoring System. IEEE Sensors Journal 12, 3 (2012), 423--430. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSEN.2010.2091719Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. Miklós Maróti, Branislav Kusy, Gyula Simon, and Ákos Lédeczi. 2004. The flooding time synchronization protocol. In Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Embedded networked sensor systems (SenSys '04). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 39--49. https://doi.org/10.1145/1031495.1031501Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. David Mills. 1992. Network time protocol (version 3) specification, implementation and analysis. Technical Report.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Stylianos Paraschiakos, Ricardo Cachucho, Matthijs Moed, Diana van Heemst, Simon Mooijaart, Eline P Slagboom, Arno Knobbe, and Marian Beekman. 2020. Activity recognition using wearable sensors for tracking the elderly. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 30, 3 (July 2020), 567--605.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Sungmee Park and Sundaresan Jayaraman. 2017. The wearables revolution and Big Data: the textile lineage. The Journal of The Textile Institute 108, 4 (April 2017), 605--614. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405000.2016.1176632 Publisher: Taylor & Francis _eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/00405000.2016.1176632.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. Thomas Plotz, Chen Chen, Nils Y. Hammerla, and Gregory D. Abowd. 2012. Automatic Synchronization of Wearable Sensors and Video-Cameras for Ground Truth Annotation -- A Practical Approach. In 2012 16th International Symposium on Wearable Computers. 100--103. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISWC.2012.15Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Carl C Rheinländer and Norbert Wehn. 2016. Precise synchronization time stamp generation for Bluetooth low energy. In 2016 IEEE SENSORS. IEEE, 1--3.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Thomas Rietveld, Riemer J. K. Vegter, Rienk M. A. van der Slikke, Aldo E. Hoekstra, Lucas H. V. van der Woude, and Sonja de Groot. 2019. Wheelchair mobility performance of elite wheelchair tennis players during four field tests: Inter-trial reliability and construct validity. PLOS ONE 14, 6 (06 2019), 1--16. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217514Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Óscar Seijo, Jesús Alberto López-Fernández, Hans-Peter Bernhard, and Iñaki Val. 2020. Enhanced Timestamping Method for Subnanosecond Time Synchronization in IEEE 802.11 Over WLAN Standard Conditions. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics 16, 9 (2020), 5792--5805. https://doi.org/10.1109/TII.2019.2959200Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. Bosch Sensortec. 2022. BME280, Combined humidity and pressure sensor. https://www.bosch-sensortec.com/media/boschsensortec/downloads/datasheets/bst-bme280-ds002.pdf. Last accessed: 2022-12-09.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Bosch Sensortec. 2022. BMP581, Barometric Pressure Sensor. https://www.bosch-sensortec.com/media/boschsensortec/downloads/datasheets/bst-bmp581-ds004.pdf. Last accessed: 2022-12-09.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Shaban Shabani, Alan K. Bourke, Amir Muaremi, Jens Praestgaard, Kate O'Keeffe, Rob Argent, Martin Brom, Celeste Scotti, Brian Caulfield, and Lorcan C. Walsh. 2022. An Automatic Foot and Shank IMU Synchronization Algorithm: Proof-of-concept. In 2022 44th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC). 4210--4213. https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC48229.2022.9871162 ISSN: 2694--0604.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. M.L. Sichitiu and C. Veerarittiphan. 2003. Simple, accurate time synchronization for wireless sensor networks. In 2003 IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking, 2003. WCNC 2003., Vol. 2. 1266--1273 vol.2. https://doi.org/10.1109/WCNC.2003.1200555 ISSN: 1525--3511.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. Kasun Somaratne, F John Dian, and Amirhossein Yousefi. 2018. Accuracy analysis of time synchronization using current consumption pattern of BLE devices. In 2018 IEEE 8th Annual Computing and Communication Workshop and Conference (CCWC). IEEE, 841--844.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  52. Andreas Spilz and Michael Munz. 2021. Novel Approach To Synchronisation Of Wearable IMUs Based On Magnetometers. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2107.03147 arXiv:2107.03147 [cs, eess].Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Sabarish Sridhar, Prasant Misra, and Jay Warrior. 2015. CheepSync: A Time Synchronization Service for Resource Constrained Bluetooth Low Energy Advertisers. CoRR abs/1501.06479 (2015). arXiv:1501.06479 http://arxiv.org/abs/1501.06479Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. STMicroelectronics. 2011. LIS2DH, MEMS digital output motion sensor: ultra low-power high performance 3-axis "femto" accelerometer. https://www.st.com/resource/en/datasheet/lis2dh.pdf. Last accessed: 2022--12--09.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Tessa Strain, Katrien Wijndaele, Paddy C Dempsey, Stephen J Sharp, Matthew Pearce, Justin Jeon, Tim Lindsay, Nick Wareham, and Søren Brage. 2020. Wearable-device-measured physical activity and future health risk. Nature Medicine 26, 9 (Sept. 2020), 1385--1391.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  56. Bharath Sundararaman, Ugo Buy, and Ajay D. Kshemkalyani. 2005. Clock synchronization for wireless sensor networks: a survey. Ad Hoc Networks 3, 3 (May 2005), 281--323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adhoc.2005.01.002Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  57. Francisco Tirado-Andrés and Alvaro Araujo. 2019. Performance of clock sources and their influence on time synchronization in wireless sensor networks. International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks 15 (Sept. 2019), 155014771987937. https://doi.org/10.1177/1550147719879372Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  58. Roberto Vio and Willem Wamsteker. 2001. Limits of the Cross-Correlation Function in the Analysis of Short Time Series. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 113, 779 (Jan. 2001), 86. https://doi.org/10.1086/317967 Publisher: The University of Chicago Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  59. Harry J Witchel, Cäcilia Oberndorfer, Robert Needham, Aoife Healy, Carina E I Westling, Joseph H Guppy, Jake Bush, Jens Barth, Chantal Herberz, Daniel Roggen, Björn M Eskofier, Waqar Rashid, Nachiappan Chockalingam, and Jochen Klucken. 2018. Thigh-Derived Inertial Sensor Metrics to Assess the Sit-to-Stand and Stand-to-Sit Transitions in the Timed Up and Go (TUG) Task for Quantifying Mobility Impairment in Multiple Sclerosis. Front Neurol 9 (Sept. 2018), 684.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. Yun C. Zhang, Shibo Zhang, Miao Liu, Elyse Daly, Samuel Battalio, Santosh Kumar, Bonnie Spring, James M. Rehg, and Nabil Alshurafa. 2020. SyncWISE: Window Induced Shift Estimation for Synchronization of Video and Accelerometry from Wearable Sensors. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 4, 3, Article 107 (sep 2020), 26 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411824Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  61. Yun C Zhang, Shibo Zhang, Miao Liu, Elyse Daly, Samuel Battalio, Santosh Kumar, Bonnie Spring, James M Rehg, and Nabil Alshurafa. 2020. Syncwise: Window induced shift estimation for synchronization of video and accelerometry from wearable sensors. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 4, 3 (2020), 1--26.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  62. Ya-Li Zheng, Xiao-Rong Ding, Carmen Chung Yan Poon, Benny Ping Lai Lo, Heye Zhang, Xiao-Lin Zhou, Guang-Zhong Yang, Ni Zhao, and Yuan-Ting Zhang. 2014. Unobtrusive sensing and wearable devices for health informatics. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 61, 5 (May 2014), 1538--1554.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. BMAR: Barometric and Motion-based Alignment and Refinement for Offline Signal Synchronization across Devices

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in

          Full Access

          • Published in

            cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies
            Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies  Volume 7, Issue 2
            June 2023
            969 pages
            EISSN:2474-9567
            DOI:10.1145/3604631
            Issue’s Table of Contents

            Copyright © 2023 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 12 June 2023
            Published in imwut Volume 7, Issue 2

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article
            • Research
            • Refereed
          • Article Metrics

            • Downloads (Last 12 months)172
            • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)23

            Other Metrics

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader