3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Using Privacy Respecting Sound Analysis to Improve Bluetooth Based Proximity Detection for COVID-19 Exposure Tracing and Social Distancing

      , , , ,
      Sensors
      MDPI AG

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          We propose to use ambient sound as a privacy-aware source of information for COVID-19-related social distance monitoring and contact tracing. The aim is to complement currently dominant Bluetooth Low Energy Received Signal Strength Indicator (BLE RSSI) approaches. These often struggle with the complexity of Radio Frequency (RF) signal attenuation, which is strongly influenced by specific surrounding characteristics. This in turn renders the relationship between signal strength and the distance between transmitter and receiver highly non-deterministic. We analyze spatio-temporal variations in what we call “ambient sound fingerprints”. We leverage the fact that ambient sound received by a mobile device is a superposition of sounds from sources at many different locations in the environment. Such a superposition is determined by the relative position of those sources with respect to the receiver. We present a method for using the above general idea to classify proximity between pairs of users based on Kullback–Leibler distance between sound intensity histograms. The method is based on intensity analysis only, and does not require the collection of any privacy sensitive signals. Further, we show how this information can be fused with BLE RSSI features using adaptive weighted voting. We also take into account that sound is not available in all windows. Our approach is evaluated in elaborate experiments in real-world settings. The results show that both Bluetooth and sound can be used to differentiate users within and out of critical distance (1.5 m) with high accuracies of 77% and 80% respectively. Their fusion, however, improves this to 86%, making evident the merit of augmenting BLE RSSI with sound. We conclude by discussing strengths and limitations of our approach and highlighting directions for future work.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Scikit-learn : machine learning in Python

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Rational use of face masks in the COVID-19 pandemic

            Since the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that caused coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the use of face masks has become ubiquitous in China and other Asian countries such as South Korea and Japan. Some provinces and municipalities in China have enforced compulsory face mask policies in public areas; however, China's national guideline has adopted a risk-based approach in offering recommendations for using face masks among health-care workers and the general public. We compared face mask use recommendations by different health authorities (panel ). Despite the consistency in the recommendation that symptomatic individuals and those in health-care settings should use face masks, discrepancies were observed in the general public and community settings.1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 For example, the US Surgeon General advised against buying masks for use by healthy people. One important reason to discourage widespread use of face masks is to preserve limited supplies for professional use in health-care settings. Universal face mask use in the community has also been discouraged with the argument that face masks provide no effective protection against coronavirus infection. Panel Recommendations on face mask use in community settings WHO 1 • If you are healthy, you only need to wear a mask if you are taking care of a person with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection. China 2 • People at moderate risk* of infection: surgical or disposable mask for medical use. • People at low risk† of infection: disposable mask for medical use. • People at very low risk‡ of infection: do not have to wear a mask or can wear non-medical mask (such as cloth mask). Hong Kong 3 • Surgical masks can prevent transmission of respiratory viruses from people who are ill. It is essential for people who are symptomatic (even if they have mild symptoms) to wear a surgical mask. • Wear a surgical mask when taking public transport or staying in crowded places. It is important to wear a mask properly and practice good hand hygiene before wearing and after removing a mask. Singapore 4 • Wear a mask if you have respiratory symptoms, such as a cough or runny nose. Japan 5 • The effectiveness of wearing a face mask to protect yourself from contracting viruses is thought to be limited. If you wear a face mask in confined, badly ventilated spaces, it might help avoid catching droplets emitted from others but if you are in an open-air environment, the use of face mask is not very efficient. USA 6 • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention does not recommend that people who are well wear a face mask (including respirators) to protect themselves from respiratory diseases, including COVID-19. • US Surgeon General urged people on Twitter to stop buying face masks. UK 7 • Face masks play a very important role in places such as hospitals, but there is very little evidence of widespread benefit for members of the public. Germany 8 • There is not enough evidence to prove that wearing a surgical mask significantly reduces a healthy person's risk of becoming infected while wearing it. According to WHO, wearing a mask in situations where it is not recommended to do so can create a false sense of security because it might lead to neglecting fundamental hygiene measures, such as proper hand hygiene. However, there is an essential distinction between absence of evidence and evidence of absence. Evidence that face masks can provide effective protection against respiratory infections in the community is scarce, as acknowledged in recommendations from the UK and Germany.7, 8 However, face masks are widely used by medical workers as part of droplet precautions when caring for patients with respiratory infections. It would be reasonable to suggest vulnerable individuals avoid crowded areas and use surgical face masks rationally when exposed to high-risk areas. As evidence suggests COVID-19 could be transmitted before symptom onset, community transmission might be reduced if everyone, including people who have been infected but are asymptomatic and contagious, wear face masks. Recommendations on face masks vary across countries and we have seen that the use of masks increases substantially once local epidemics begin, including the use of N95 respirators (without any other protective equipment) in community settings. This increase in use of face masks by the general public exacerbates the global supply shortage of face masks, with prices soaring, 9 and risks supply constraints to frontline health-care professionals. As a response, a few countries (eg, Germany and South Korea) banned exportation of face masks to prioritise local demand. 10 WHO called for a 40% increase in the production of protective equipment, including face masks. 9 Meanwhile, health authorities should optimise face mask distribution to prioritise the needs of frontline health-care workers and the most vulnerable populations in communities who are more susceptible to infection and mortality if infected, including older adults (particularly those older than 65 years) and people with underlying health conditions. People in some regions (eg, Thailand, China, and Japan) opted for makeshift alternatives or repeated usage of disposable surgical masks. Notably, improper use of face masks, such as not changing disposable masks, could jeopardise the protective effect and even increase the risk of infection. Consideration should also be given to variations in societal and cultural paradigms of mask usage. The contrast between face mask use as hygienic practice (ie, in many Asian countries) or as something only people who are unwell do (ie, in European and North American countries) has induced stigmatisation and racial aggravations, for which further public education is needed. One advantage of universal use of face masks is that it prevents discrimination of individuals who wear masks when unwell because everybody is wearing a mask. It is time for governments and public health agencies to make rational recommendations on appropriate face mask use to complement their recommendations on other preventive measures, such as hand hygiene. WHO currently recommends that people should wear face masks if they have respiratory symptoms or if they are caring for somebody with symptoms. Perhaps it would also be rational to recommend that people in quarantine wear face masks if they need to leave home for any reason, to prevent potential asymptomatic or presymptomatic transmission. In addition, vulnerable populations, such as older adults and those with underlying medical conditions, should wear face masks if available. Universal use of face masks could be considered if supplies permit. In parallel, urgent research on the duration of protection of face masks, the measures to prolong life of disposable masks, and the invention on reusable masks should be encouraged. Taiwan had the foresight to create a large stockpile of face masks; other countries or regions might now consider this as part of future pandemic plans. © 2020 Sputnik/Science Photo Library 2020 Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The positive impact of lockdown in Wuhan on containing the COVID-19 outbreak in China

              Abstract Background With its epicenter in Wuhan, China, the COVID-19 outbreak was declared a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) by the World Health Organization (WHO). Consequently, many countries have implemented flight restrictions to China. China itself has imposed a lockdown of the population of Wuhan as well as the entire Hubei province. However, whether these two enormous measures have led to significant changes in the spread of COVID-19 cases remains unclear. Methods We analyzed available data on the development of confirmed domestic and international COVID-19 cases before and after lockdown measures. We evaluated the correlation of domestic air traffic to the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases and determined the growth curves of COVID-19 cases within China before and after lockdown as well as after changes in COVID-19 diagnostic criteria. Results Our findings indicate a significant increase in doubling time from 2 days (95% Confidence Interval, CI): 1.9–2.6), to 4 days (95% CI: 3.5–4.3), after imposing lockdown. A further increase is detected after changing diagnostic and testing methodology to 19.3 (95% CI: 15.1–26.3), respectively. Moreover, the correlation between domestic air traffic and COVID-19 spread became weaker following lockdown (before lockdown: r = 0.98, p < 0.05 vs. after lockdown: r = 0.91, p = NS). Conclusions A significantly decreased growth rate and increased doubling time of cases was observed, which is most likely due to Chinese lockdown measures. A more stringent confinement of people in high risk areas seem to have a potential to slow down the spread of COVID-19.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                SENSC9
                Sensors
                Sensors
                MDPI AG
                1424-8220
                August 2021
                August 20 2021
                : 21
                : 16
                : 5604
                Article
                10.3390/s21165604
                254f02c3-7988-44d9-a4eb-ab5a4fcffec0
                © 2021

                https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article