Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byOlivia Shaw Modified over 9 years ago
1
Presenter: Ailane Mohamed Toufik Authors : Jie Yang †, Simon Sidhom †, Gayathri Chandrasekaran ∗, Tam Vu ∗, Hongbo Liu †, Nicolae Cecan ∗, Yingying Chen †, Marco Gruteser ∗, Richard P. Martin ∗ † Dept. of ECE, Stevens Institute of Technology ∗ WINLAB, Rutgers University ACM MobiCom 2011
2
Motivation Existing solutions System design Evaluation Conclusion Personal critics and paper weaknesses
3
2.75 people die Every day U.S. Department of Transportation – National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Only in 2009
4
hands-free devices Minds off driving. Cognitive load distract driver! Real-world accidents indicated that hands-free and handheld users are as likely to be involved in accidents
5
Law Several States ban handheld phone use China / Algeria and many countries as well Technology Hard blocking: radio jammer, blocking phone calls, texting, chat … Soft interaction Routing incoming calls to voicemail, Delaying incoming text notifications Automatic reply to callers Automatic Reply: “I’m driving right now; will get back with you!”
6
HandoverSignal Strength Car’s speedometer GPS The Previous solutions make use of: Problem: Only detects if the phone is in a moving vehicle or not 38% of automobile trips include passengers
7
Detect we are in a moving Car Check if it’s the Driver phone Route incoming calls…etc We will use GPSUse existing solution Our paper concern
8
Acoustic approach based on two assumptions: Use the seat location to determine the drivers phone Phone is allowed to access the stereo system Bluetooth Symmetric positioning of speakers Phone connecting with head unit
9
Audio head unit
10
Propagation Delay ∆T ij = 0 : Phone is Equidistant from i and j ∆T ij > 0 : Phone is Closer to speaker i ∆T ij < 0 : Phone is Closer to speaker j ∆t ij ∆t’ ij Speaker iSpeaker j ∆T ij = ∆t’ ij - ∆t ij
11
Unobtrusiveness Robustness to noise and multipath Computation Feasibility on Smartphone
12
the frequency range of human hearing is generally considered to be 20 Hz to 20kHz, high frequency sounds must be much louder to be noticeable
13
the current cell phone microphones are more sensitive to this high-frequency range. We experimented with an iPhone 3G and an Android Developer Phone 2 (ADP2).
14
16-18kHz ADP2 phone 18-20kHz iPhone 3G
15
Noise from: Engine, Tire/road and Wind < 1KHz Conversations range from 300Hz to 3400Hz Music can range from 50Hz, 15.000Hz which covers all naturally occurring sound => To overcome robustness challenge we choose a signal above 15Khz
16
Length: Too short: a beep is not picked up by the microphone Too long a beep: will add delay to the system and will be more susceptible to multi-path distortions. We found empirically that a beep length of 400 samples (i.e., 10 ms) represents a good tradeoff.
18
∆d24 is the distance difference from two right speakers. ∆d ij > TH lr ∆d ij = c * ∆ T ij (∆d ij + ∆d ij ) /2 > TH fb ∆T ij = S ij * f S ij is the number of samples that the beeps were apart f is the sampling frequency (typically 44.1kHz). c is the speed of the sound TH lr is a threshold that could be chosen as zero / -5cm ∆d13 represent the distance difference from two left side speakers
19
Phones Cars ADP2 Bluetooth radio 16-bit 44.1kHz sampling rate 192 RAM 528MHz MSM7200 processor Iphone 3G Bluetooth radio 16-bit 44.1kHz sampling rate 256 RAM 600 MHz Cortex A8processor Honda Civic Si Coupe Bluetooth radio Two channel audio system two front and two rear speakers Interior dimension Car I: 175 x 183 cm Car II: 185x 203cm Acura sedan
20
Testing positions Different number of occupants Different noise conditions Highway Driving 60MPH + music playing + w/o window opened Phones at front seats only Stationary Varying background noise: idling engine + conversation
22
22 4 channel, all seats2 channel, front seats
23
Cup-holder v.s. co-driver left
24
Enabled a first generation system of detecting driver phone use through a smartphone app Practical today in all cars with built-in Bluetooth Leveraging car speakers – without additional hardware Validated the generality of our approach with two kinds of phones and in two different cars Classification accuracy of over 90%, and around 95% with some calibrations Limitations Phone is muffled by bag or winter coat Driver places the phone on an empty passenger seat
25
Why not fade music to lower the complexity. Why not testing all positions in all scenarios. Really, I should use this app ? Develop a dedicated system with self-calibration ability. ?
26
DRIVE SAFELY TALK & TEXT LATER
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.