Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing 2015
DOI: 10.1145/2750858.2805831
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The potential and challenges of inferring thermal comfort at home using commodity sensors

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
43
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 37 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
43
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This vision has been supported [9,12,38,40] and challenged [24,32,39] by HCI researchers and practitioners for decades. Second, the ongoing pursuit of the sustainable smart home [1,18,19,31,40]. In most smart home research these visions have been pursued separately and potentially undermine each other.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This vision has been supported [9,12,38,40] and challenged [24,32,39] by HCI researchers and practitioners for decades. Second, the ongoing pursuit of the sustainable smart home [1,18,19,31,40]. In most smart home research these visions have been pursued separately and potentially undermine each other.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…3). The reported results [27] of Ghahramani et al showed a precision of 93.3% and sensitivity of 56.22% without clarifying the precision and sensitivity of the uncomfortable states of warm and cool. On the other hand, our results of (Model III Conf.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…In their study [27], Ghahramani et al used HMM classification technique, in which three classes of thermal comfort, namely, comfortable, uncomfortably cool and uncomfortably warm are used. An important point to be considered in the work of Ghahramani et al [27] is the class imbalance in their used experimental data between the positive class (comfortable), which represents 81% of the data and the negative class (uncomfortable), which represents only 19% of the data. Therefore, using the classification accuracy (reported 82.8 %) is considered misleading in this case.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Existing HCI work on thermal comfort extends to wearable sensors for personal thermostat control [12] and for sensing thermal comfort [5,16]. Compact wrist-wearable pulse and skin temperature sensors can provide accurate real-time physiological thermal comfort information from multiple users [5,16].…”
Section: Background: Refining Smart Thermostat Operation Through Humamentioning
confidence: 99%