Advertisement

Analysis of Chewing Sounds for Dietary Monitoring

  • Oliver Amft
  • Mathias Stäger
  • Paul Lukowicz
  • Gerhard Tröster
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3660)

Abstract

The paper reports the results of the first stage of our work on an automatic dietary monitoring system. The work is part of a large European project on using ubiquitous systems to support healthy lifestyle and cardiovascular disease prevention. We demonstrate that sound from the user’s mouth can be used to detect that he/she is eating. The paper also shows how different kinds of food can be recognized by analyzing chewing sounds. The sounds are acquired with a microphone located inside the ear canal. This is an unobtrusive location widely accepted in other applications (hearing aids, headsets). To validate our method we present experimental results containing 3500 seconds of chewing data from four subjects on four different food types typically found in a meal. Up to 99% accuracy is achieved on eating recognition and between 80% to 100% on food type classification.

Keywords

Recognition Rate Speech Signal Audio Signal Food Type Potato Chip 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Mynatt, E., Melenhorst, A.S., Fisk, A.D., Rogers, W.: Aware technologies for aging in place: understanding user needs and attitudes. IEEE Pervasive Computing 3, 36–41 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gellersen, H.W., Schmidt, A., Beigl, M.: Multi-sensor context-awareness in mobile devices and smart artifacts. Mobile Networks and Applications 7, 341–351 (2002)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Philipose, M., Fishkin, K., Perkowitz, M., Patterson, D., Fox, D., Kautz, H., Hahnel, D.: Inferring activities from interactions with objects. IEEE Pervasive Computing 3, 50–57 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mihailidis, A., Carmichael, B., Boger, J.: The use of computer vision in an intelligent environment to support aging-in-place, safety, and independence in the home. IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine 8, 238–247 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Römer, K., Schoch, T., Mattern, F., Dübendorfer, T.: Smart identification frameworks for ubiquitous computing applications. In: PerCom 2003: Proc. of the First IEEE Int’l Conference Pervasive Computing and Communications (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Beigl, M., Gellersen, H.W., Schmidt, A.: MediaCups: Experience with design and use of computer-augmented everyday artefacts. Computer Networks, Special Issue on Pervasive Computing 35, 401–409 (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vickers, Z., Christensen, C.: Relationships between sensory crispness and other sensory and instrumental parameters. Journal of Texture Studies, 291–307 (1980)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vickers, Z.: Relationships of chewing sounds to judgements of crispness crunchiness and hardness. Journal of Texture Studies, 121–124 (1981)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Drake, B.: Food crushing sounds. an introductory study. Journal of Food Science, 233–241 (1963)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lee, W., Schweitzer, G., Morgan, G., Shepherd, D.: Analysis of food crushing sounds during mastication: Total sound level studies. Journal of Texture Studies, 156–178 (1990)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kapur, K.: Frequency spectrographic analysis of bone conducted chewing sounds in persons with natural and artifcial dentitions. Journal of Texture Studies, 50–61 (1971)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dacremont, C., Colas, B., Sauvageot, F.: Contribution of air- and bone-conduction to the creation of sounds perceived during sensory evaluation of foods. Journal of Texture Studies, 443–456 (1991)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vickers, Z.: Sensory acoustical and force? Deformation measurements of potato chip crispness. Journal of Texture Studies, 138–140 (1987)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Szczesniak, A.: Texture: Is it still an overlooked food attribute? Food Technology, 86–95 (1990)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    AlChakra, W., Allaf, K., Jemai, A.: Characterization of brittle food products: Application of the acoustical emission method. Journal of Texture Studies, 327–348 (1996)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Edmister, J., Vickers, Z.: Instrumental acoustical measures of crispness in foods. Journal of Texture Studies, 153–167 (1985)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vincent, J.F.V.: The quantification of crispness. Journal of Science in Food Argiculture, 162–168 (1998)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    DeBelie, N., De Smedt, V.J. D.B.: Principal component analysis of chewing sounds to detect differences in apple crispness. Journal of Postharvest Biology and Technology, 109–119 (2000)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Brenman, H., Weiss, R., Black, M.: Sound as a diagnostic aid in the detection of occlusion discrepancies. Penn Dental Journal (1966)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Watt, D.: Gnathosonics - a study of sound produced by the masticatory mechanism. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry (1966) Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Prinz, J.: Computer aided gnathosonic analysis: distinguishing between single and multiple tooth impact sounds. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, 682–689 (2000)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Widmalm, S., Williams, W., Zengh, C.: Time frequency distribution of tmj sounds. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation (1991)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tyson, K.: Monitoring the state of occlusion - gnathosonics can be reliable. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, 395–402 (1998)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hutchings, J., Lillford, D.: The perception of food texture - the philosophy of the breakdown path. Journal of Texture Studies, 103–115 (1988)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Brochetti, D., Penfield, M., Burchfield, S.: Speech analysis techniques: A potential model for the study of mastication sounds. Journal of Texture Studies, 111– 138 (1992)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Watt, D.: Gnathosonics and Occlusal Dynamics. Praeger New York (1981)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Stäger, M., Lukowicz, P., Perera, N., von Büren, T., Tröster, G., Starner, T.: SoundButton: Design of a Low Power Wearable Audio Classification System. In: ISWC 2003: Proc. of the 7th IEEE Int’l Symposium on Wearable Computers, pp.12–17 (2003)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Li, S.Z.: Content-based audio classification and retrieval using the nearest feature line method. IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing 8, 619–625 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Li, D., Sethi, I., Dimitrova, N., McGee, T.: Classification of general audio data for content-based retrieval. Pattern Recognition Letters 22, 533–544 (2001)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Peltonen, V., Tuomi, J., Klapuri, A., Huopaniemi, J., Sorsa, T.: Computational auditory scene recognition. In: IEEE Int’l Conf. on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, vol. 2, pp. 1941–1944 (2002)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Witten, I.H., Frank, E.: Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques with Java Implementations. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1999)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Provost, F., Fawcett, T.: Analysis and visualization of classifier performance: Comparison under imprecise class and cost distributions. In: KDD 1997: Proc. of the 3rd Int’l Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp.43–48 (1997)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Oliver Amft
    • 1
  • Mathias Stäger
    • 1
  • Paul Lukowicz
    • 2
  • Gerhard Tröster
    • 1
  1. 1.Wearable Computing LabSwiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) ZürichSwitzerland
  2. 2.Institute for Computer Systems and NetworksUniversity for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology (UMIT)Hall in TirolAustria

Personalised recommendations