Cargando…
Using Bluetooth proximity sensing to determine where office workers spend time at work
BACKGROUND: Most wearable devices that measure movement in workplaces cannot determine the context in which people spend time. This study examined the accuracy of Bluetooth sensing (10-second intervals) via the ActiGraph GT9X Link monitor to determine location in an office setting, using two simple,...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5841797/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29513754 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193971 |
_version_ | 1783304799699075072 |
---|---|
author | Clark, Bronwyn K. Winkler, Elisabeth A. Brakenridge, Charlotte L. Trost, Stewart G. Healy, Genevieve N. |
author_facet | Clark, Bronwyn K. Winkler, Elisabeth A. Brakenridge, Charlotte L. Trost, Stewart G. Healy, Genevieve N. |
author_sort | Clark, Bronwyn K. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Most wearable devices that measure movement in workplaces cannot determine the context in which people spend time. This study examined the accuracy of Bluetooth sensing (10-second intervals) via the ActiGraph GT9X Link monitor to determine location in an office setting, using two simple, bespoke algorithms. METHODS: For one work day (mean±SD 6.2±1.1 hours), 30 office workers (30% men, aged 38±11 years) simultaneously wore chest-mounted cameras (video recording) and Bluetooth-enabled monitors (initialised as receivers) on the wrist and thigh. Additional monitors (initialised as beacons) were placed in the entry, kitchen, photocopy room, corridors, and the wearer’s office. Firstly, participant presence/absence at each location was predicted from the presence/absence of signals at that location (ignoring all other signals). Secondly, using the information gathered at multiple locations simultaneously, a simple heuristic model was used to predict at which location the participant was present. The Bluetooth-determined location for each algorithm was tested against the camera in terms of F-scores. RESULTS: When considering locations individually, the accuracy obtained was excellent in the office (F-score = 0.98 and 0.97 for thigh and wrist positions) but poor in other locations (F-score = 0.04 to 0.36), stemming primarily from a high false positive rate. The multi-location algorithm exhibited high accuracy for the office location (F-score = 0.97 for both wear positions). It also improved the F-scores obtained in the remaining locations, but not always to levels indicating good accuracy (e.g., F-score for photocopy room ≈0.1 in both wear positions). CONCLUSIONS: The Bluetooth signalling function shows promise for determining where workers spend most of their time (i.e., their office). Placing beacons in multiple locations and using a rule-based decision model improved classification accuracy; however, for workplace locations visited infrequently or with considerable movement, accuracy was below desirable levels. Further development of algorithms is warranted. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5841797 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-58417972018-03-23 Using Bluetooth proximity sensing to determine where office workers spend time at work Clark, Bronwyn K. Winkler, Elisabeth A. Brakenridge, Charlotte L. Trost, Stewart G. Healy, Genevieve N. PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Most wearable devices that measure movement in workplaces cannot determine the context in which people spend time. This study examined the accuracy of Bluetooth sensing (10-second intervals) via the ActiGraph GT9X Link monitor to determine location in an office setting, using two simple, bespoke algorithms. METHODS: For one work day (mean±SD 6.2±1.1 hours), 30 office workers (30% men, aged 38±11 years) simultaneously wore chest-mounted cameras (video recording) and Bluetooth-enabled monitors (initialised as receivers) on the wrist and thigh. Additional monitors (initialised as beacons) were placed in the entry, kitchen, photocopy room, corridors, and the wearer’s office. Firstly, participant presence/absence at each location was predicted from the presence/absence of signals at that location (ignoring all other signals). Secondly, using the information gathered at multiple locations simultaneously, a simple heuristic model was used to predict at which location the participant was present. The Bluetooth-determined location for each algorithm was tested against the camera in terms of F-scores. RESULTS: When considering locations individually, the accuracy obtained was excellent in the office (F-score = 0.98 and 0.97 for thigh and wrist positions) but poor in other locations (F-score = 0.04 to 0.36), stemming primarily from a high false positive rate. The multi-location algorithm exhibited high accuracy for the office location (F-score = 0.97 for both wear positions). It also improved the F-scores obtained in the remaining locations, but not always to levels indicating good accuracy (e.g., F-score for photocopy room ≈0.1 in both wear positions). CONCLUSIONS: The Bluetooth signalling function shows promise for determining where workers spend most of their time (i.e., their office). Placing beacons in multiple locations and using a rule-based decision model improved classification accuracy; however, for workplace locations visited infrequently or with considerable movement, accuracy was below desirable levels. Further development of algorithms is warranted. Public Library of Science 2018-03-07 /pmc/articles/PMC5841797/ /pubmed/29513754 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193971 Text en © 2018 Clark et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Clark, Bronwyn K. Winkler, Elisabeth A. Brakenridge, Charlotte L. Trost, Stewart G. Healy, Genevieve N. Using Bluetooth proximity sensing to determine where office workers spend time at work |
title | Using Bluetooth proximity sensing to determine where office workers spend time at work |
title_full | Using Bluetooth proximity sensing to determine where office workers spend time at work |
title_fullStr | Using Bluetooth proximity sensing to determine where office workers spend time at work |
title_full_unstemmed | Using Bluetooth proximity sensing to determine where office workers spend time at work |
title_short | Using Bluetooth proximity sensing to determine where office workers spend time at work |
title_sort | using bluetooth proximity sensing to determine where office workers spend time at work |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5841797/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29513754 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193971 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT clarkbronwynk usingbluetoothproximitysensingtodeterminewhereofficeworkersspendtimeatwork AT winklerelisabetha usingbluetoothproximitysensingtodeterminewhereofficeworkersspendtimeatwork AT brakenridgecharlottel usingbluetoothproximitysensingtodeterminewhereofficeworkersspendtimeatwork AT troststewartg usingbluetoothproximitysensingtodeterminewhereofficeworkersspendtimeatwork AT healygenevieven usingbluetoothproximitysensingtodeterminewhereofficeworkersspendtimeatwork |