4.7 Article

Unobtrusive occupancy and vital signs sensing for human building interactive systems

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 13, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-27425-6

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cognitive buildings can adjust lighting, temperature, ventilation, and other environmental parameters based on occupants' responses to the built environment. Doppler-radar based sensors have shown accurate occupancy detection and estimation of vital signs in challenging scenarios where other sensors fail. These sensors provide valuable information for space utilization optimization and can be used to improve human-building interactive systems.
Cognitive buildings use data on how occupants respond to the built environment to proactively make occupant-centric adjustments to lighting, temperature, ventilation, and other environmental parameters. However, sensors that unobtrusively and ubiquitously measure occupant responses are lacking. Here we show that Doppler-radar based sensors, which can sense small physiological motions, provide accurate occupancy detection and estimation of vital signs in challenging, realistic circumstances. Occupancy was differentiated from an empty room over 93% of the time in a 3.4 m x 8.5 m conference room with a single sensor in both wall and ceiling-mounted configurations. Occupancy was successfully detected while an occupant was under the table, visibly blocked from the sensor, a scenario where infrared, ultrasound, and video-based occupancy sensors would fail. Heart and respiratory rates were detected in all seats in the conference room with a single ceiling-mounted sensor. The occupancy sensor can be used to control HVAC and lighting with a short, 1-2 min delay and to provide information for space utilization optimization. Heart and respiratory rate sensing could provide additional feedback to future human-building interactive systems that use vital signs to determine how occupant comfort and wellness is changing with time.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据