4.6 Article

Cigarette Smoking Detection with an Inertial Sensor and a Smart Lighter

Journal

SENSORS
Volume 19, Issue 3, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/s19030570

Keywords

cigarette smoking; hand gestures; IMU sensor; lighter; unobtrusive sensing; wearable sensors

Funding

  1. National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health [R01DA035828]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In recent years, a number of wearable approaches have been introduced for objective monitoring of cigarette smoking based on monitoring of hand gestures, breathing or cigarette lighting events. However, non-reactive, objective and accurate measurement of everyday cigarette consumption in the wild remains a challenge. This study utilizes a wearable sensor system (Personal Automatic Cigarette Tracker 2.0, PACT2.0) and proposes a method that integrates information from an instrumented lighter and a 6-axis Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) on the wrist for accurate detection of smoking events. The PACT2.0 was utilized in a study of 35 moderate to heavy smokers in both controlled (1.5-2 h) and unconstrained free-living conditions (similar to 24 h). The collected dataset contained approximately 871 h of IMU data, 463 lighting events, and 443 cigarettes. The proposed method identified smoking events from the cigarette lighter data and estimated puff counts by detecting hand-to-mouth gestures (HMG) in the IMU data by a Support Vector Machine (SVM) classifier. The leave-one-subject-out (LOSO) cross-validation on the data from the controlled portion of the study achieved high accuracy and F1-score of smoking event detection and estimation of puff counts (97%/98% and 93%/86%, respectively). The results of validation in free-living demonstrate 84.9% agreement with self-reported cigarettes. These results suggest that an IMU and instrumented lighter may potentially be used in studies of smoking behavior under natural conditions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available