HeadsUp: Keeping Pedestrian Phone Addicts from Dangers Using Mobile Phone Sensors

Walking while staring at the mobile phone is dangerous, and the danger mainly arises from distraction. While watching the mobile phone, one could fall into a deep well without noticing the manhole cover was missing, one could be hit by a rushing car without observing the traffic light, and so forth....

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International journal of distributed sensor networks 2015-01, Vol.2015 (5), p.279846
Main Author: Zhou, Zhengjuan
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Accelerometers
Automobile safety
Behavior
Cell phones
Cellular telephones
Deaths
Gravity
Gyroscopes
Locks
Noise
Pedestrians
Safety
Safety and security measures
Sampling
Sensors
Statistics
Technology application
Walking
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Walking while staring at the mobile phone is dangerous, and the danger mainly arises from distraction. While watching the mobile phone, one could fall into a deep well without noticing the manhole cover was missing, one could be hit by a rushing car without observing the traffic light, and so forth. Some mobile phone users are already aware of the crisis, and they keep looking up and down to allocate some focus to danger spying; however, the statistics data revealed by US government make such efforts frustrating: about 1,152 pedestrians are injured in US in the year 2010, while they were using mobile phones, and the number doubled in the year 2012. This paper identified the possibility of using mobile phone sensors to develop a walk pattern recognition system. By sampling from embedded sensor, such as accelerometer and gyroscope, the movement pattern of mobile phone users can be computed. We design and implement HeadsUp, a system that warns pedestrian and locks the screen when one looks at the mobile phone while walking. Evaluation results from experiments of 20 testers in real life situation show that, on average, the false negative rate is less than 3%.
ISSN:1550-1329
1550-1477
1550-1477
DOI:10.1155/2015/279846