
Monitoring fluid intake is essential to help people manage their individual fluid intake behaviors and achieve adequate hydration. Previous studies of fluid intake assessment approaches based on inertial sensors can be categorized into wrist-worn-based and smart-container-based approaches. This study aims to analyze wrist-worn-based and smart-container-based fluid intake assessment approaches using inertial sensors. The comparison of these two approaches should be analyzed according to gesture recognition and volume estimation. In addition, the influence of the fill level and sip size information on the performance is explored in this study. The accuracy of gesture recognition with postprocessing is 92.89% and 91.8% for the wrist-worn-based approach and smart-container-based approach, respectively. For volume estimation, sip-size-dependent models can achieve better performance than general SVR models for both wrist-worn-based and smart-container-based approaches. The improvement of MAPE, MAD, and RMSE can reach over 50% except MAPE for small sip sizes. The results demonstrate that the sip size information and recognition performance are important for fluid intake assessment approaches.
wrist-worn sensor, smart-container sensor, gesture recognition, Drinking, Wrist, fluid intake assessment, Article, Wearable Electronic Devices, volume estimation, Humans, TP248.13-248.65, Biotechnology
wrist-worn sensor, smart-container sensor, gesture recognition, Drinking, Wrist, fluid intake assessment, Article, Wearable Electronic Devices, volume estimation, Humans, TP248.13-248.65, Biotechnology
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 9 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
