| Literature DB >> 31010166 |
Qiancheng Liang1, Lisheng Xu2,3, Nan Bao4, Lin Qi5, Jingjing Shi6, Yicheng Yang7, Yudong Yao8.
Abstract
With the rapid increase in the development of miniaturized sensors and embedded devices for vital signs monitoring, personal physiological signal monitoring devices are becoming popular. However, physiological monitoring devices which are worn on the body normally affect the daily activities of people. This problem can be avoided by using a non-contact measuring device like the Doppler radar system, which is more convenient, is private compared to video monitoring, infrared monitoring and other non-contact methods. Additionally real-time physiological monitoring with the Doppler radar system can also obtain signal changes caused by motion changes. As a result, the Doppler radar system not only obtains the information of respiratory and cardiac signals, but also obtains information about body movement. The relevant RF technology could eliminate some interference from body motion with a small amplitude. However, the motion recognition method can also be used to classify related body motion signals. In this paper, a vital sign and body movement monitoring system worked at 2.4 GHz was proposed. It can measure various physiological signs of the human body in a non-contact manner. The accuracy of the non-contact physiological signal monitoring system was analyzed. First, the working distance of the system was tested. Then, the algorithm of mining collective motion signal was classified, and the accuracy was 88%, which could be further improved in the system. In addition, the mean absolute error values of heart rate and respiratory rate were 0.8 beats/min and 3.5 beats/min, respectively, and the reliability of the system was verified by comparing the respiratory waveforms with the contact equipment at different distances.Entities:
Keywords: body movement classify; doppler bio-radar; non-contact monitoring system; physiological signals
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31010166 PMCID: PMC6627890 DOI: 10.3390/bios9020058
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biosensors (Basel) ISSN: 2079-6374
Figure 1Geometry model of the printed dipole array antenna.
Figure 2The three-dimensional radiation pattern of the dipole array antenna used in the system.
Figure 3Schematic diagram of hardware system.
Figure 4Low pass filter. (a) Circuit diagram of low pass filter. (b) Bode diagram of low pass filter.
Figure 5Signals corresponding to different movement states. (a) Limb moving. (b) Unmanned environment. (c) Static measurement. (d) A second person entering. (e) Sitting down. (f) Standing up.
Figure 6Respiratory signal. (a) The original signal from the contact band sensor; (b) Reconstructed respiratory signal.
Figure 7Heartbeat signal. (a) The original signal of the pulse sensor. (b) Reconstructed body movement signal caused by heartbeat.
Figure 8The experiment scene and devices (transceiver, serial port module and antenna).
Figure 9The relation between electromagnetic wave energy and distance received by antenna.
Support Vector Machine classification accuracy after genetic selection algorithm optimization.
| A | B | C | D | E | F | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 0.75 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.12 | 0.02 | 0.06 |
| B | 0.11 | 0.79 | 0.02 | 0.07 | 0.03 | 0.05 |
| C | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.83 | 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.04 |
| D | 0.09 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.76 | 0 | 0.01 |
| E | 0.01 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.82 | 0.10 |
| F | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0 | 0.12 | 0.74 |
Classification accuracy of the deep learning algorithm.
| A | B | C | D | E | F | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 0.91 | 0 | 0.01 | 0 | 0 | 0.04 |
| B | 0.01 | 0.96 | 0 | 0 | 0.01 | 0 |
| C | 0.08 | 0.02 | 0.99 | 0 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| D | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.01 |
| E | 0 | 0.02 | 0 | 0 | 0.76 | 0.30 |
| F | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.22 | 0.64 |
Figure 10Accuracy comparison of deep learning algorithm and Support Vector Machine algorithm in RF signal state classification.
Figure 11Error analysis of three different distances.
The comparison between two systems.
| [ | Proposed System | |
|---|---|---|
| Maximum distance | 1 m | 0.4 m |
| Methods of classification | SVM | VGG-16 and LSTM |
| Classification accuracy | 85% | >88% |
| Error of respiratory detection | 13% | 0.779 beats/min |
| Error of Heart rate detection | No experiment | 3.49 beats/min |