Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 8 minor 72 references

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge.

T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. The mark states how deep the mechanical check went, never who wrote it. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · glm-5.2

Glasses Sense Pulse and Jaw Motion on 4 Microwatts

2026-07-08 03:19 UTC pith:YPPIMQOR

load-bearing objection Multi-site TENG sensors on glasses with 1.36 µW/channel front-end; HR claim uses oracle sensor selection the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.06509 v1 pith:YPPIMQOR submitted 2026-07-07 cs.HC

GlassTENG: Self-Powered Triboelectric Nanogenerator based Sensing of Pulse, Jaw, and Upper Facial Activity from Everyday Glasses

Raj N. Dave , Jovanis Prodanich , Yung-ching Lai , Oscar Jakacki , Stanley Lin , Jack Thoene , Nabil Alshurafa , Nivedita Arora This is my paper
classification cs.HC
keywords triboelectric nanogeneratorself-powered sensingsmart glasseswearable sensorspulse sensingactivity recognitionultra-low-power electronicsanalog front-end
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper asks whether rich physiological sensing — arterial pulse, jaw kinematics, and upper facial activity — can be extracted from everyday glasses using only a few microwatts of power, roughly three orders of magnitude less than conventional optical or electrode-based sensors. The authors build GlassTENG, a system of three custom triboelectric nanogenerator (TENG) sensors embedded at the nasal bridge, anterior temple, and posterior temple of a glasses frame. Each TENG converts the tiny mechanical forces of arterial pulsation and muscle movement directly into electrical signals, eliminating the need for powered emitters or gels. A high-impedance analog front-end draws 1.36 microwatts per channel (4.1 microwatts total), conditioning these self-generated voltage signals for digitization. In a 20-participant study, the system classified six jaw and upper facial activities with 93.8% accuracy using leave-one-subject-out cross-validation, and estimated heart rate with 1.82 BPM mean absolute error against a chest-strap reference across 10 participants in resting conditions. The central mechanism is the co-design of flexible PDMS/FEP triboelectric layers — sensitive to forces as small as 0.01 N — with an 18-teraohm-input front-end that can read the resulting high-impedance signals at negligible power cost. The paper positions this as a sensing front-end proof-of-concept: the TENGs are self-powered for transduction, but the downstream microcontroller and any energy harvesting for fully battery-free operation remain future work.

Core claim

The core finding is that triboelectric nanogenerator sensors, fabricated from PDMS and FEP films with silver electrodes, can be integrated into a glasses frame at three anatomically targeted sites — the angular artery, superficial temporal artery, and temporalis muscle — and produce voltage signals (50 mV to 1.5 V) of sufficient quality to simultaneously recover arterial pulse waveforms and classify six facial/jaw activities, all while the analog front-end consumes only 1.36 microwatts per channel. This is three orders of magnitude below the milliwatt-level power draw of optical PPG, EMG, or load-cell sensors used in prior eyewear systems. The 20-participant validation demonstrates that the

What carries the argument

PDMS/FEP triboelectric nanogenerator sensors with silver electrodes, operating in vertical contact-separation mode, read by a TLV8802-based unity-gain amplifier with 18 TΩ input impedance at 1.36 µW per channel

Load-bearing premise

The entire signal chain depends on consistent, comfortable mechanical coupling between each TENG sensor and the skin at three facial sites; the 20-participant validation was conducted in seated, resting conditions, and whether the sensors maintain adequate contact and signal quality during walking, head movement, or prolonged wear is not established.

What would settle it

If participants wearing the glasses during normal ambulatory activity (walking, talking, head turning) produce TENG signals where the pulse waveform is unrecognizable or activity classification drops below ~80%, the claim that this is a viable platform for longitudinal physiological monitoring would be undermined.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • If the sensing chain holds during real-world movement, glasses-based cardiovascular monitoring could operate without the continuous power drain of optical emitters, potentially extending smart-glasses battery life by hours compared to adding PPG or EMG.
  • Multi-site pulse waveform capture from the angular and superficial temporal arteries could enable pulse transit time measurements between facial arterial sites, opening a pathway to cuffless blood pressure estimation from eyewear.
  • The 93.8% activity classification accuracy, with the primary confusion between talking and eating, suggests that adding a fourth sensor or richer temporal features could disambiguate oral activities — a capability relevant to dietary monitoring and bruxism detection.
  • The 1.36 µW-per-channel front-end budget is small enough that a glasses frame covered with indoor solar cells harvesting 200–300 µW could plausibly power the entire sensing chain, making fully battery-free physiological eyewear a tractable engineering target.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The Bland-Altman limits of agreement (−5.17 to +5.58 BPM) are wide enough that clinical-grade heart rate monitoring would likely require longer averaging windows or motion-artifact rejection beyond what seated resting conditions validate; real-world ambulatory use may degrade these numbers substantially.
  • The nonlinearity of the TENG force-voltage response across the 0.01–5 N range means that the mapping from sensor voltage to biomechanical force is participant-dependent; per-participant normalization was used here, but a calibration-free deployment would need a model of how facial anatomy varies this transfer function across populations.
  • If S2 (the superficial temporal artery sensor on a dedicated downward arm) is eliminated as the authors suggest, the system loses one of three pulse sites; whether two-site pulse capture still supports the multi-site blood pressure pathway the paper envisions is an open question.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 8 minor

Summary. This paper presents GlassTENG, a system integrating three custom-fabricated triboelectric nanogenerator (TENG) sensors into a glasses frame at the angular artery (nasal bridge), superficial temporal artery (anterior temple), and temporalis muscle (posterior temple). Each sensor operates through a vertical contact-separation mechanism using PDMS and FEP layers with silver electrodes, paired with a 1.36 µW-per-channel high-impedance analog front-end (TLV8802 op-amp). The system simultaneously captures arterial pulse waveforms and classifies six jaw/upper facial activities. A 20-participant study (Study 1) evaluates activity recognition via LOSO cross-validation, achieving 93.8% accuracy with a Random Forest classifier across seven classes (including No Activity). A 10-participant subset (Study 2) validates heart rate estimation against a Polar H10 chest strap, reporting 1.82 BPM MAE with Bland-Altman limits of agreement from −5.17 to +5.58 BPM. The paper positions GlassTENG as a step toward battery-free, longitudinally worn physiological sensing from eyewear.

Significance. The paper makes a solid hardware contribution in demonstrating that custom TENG sensors can transduce sub-Newton physiological forces (arterial pulse at ~0.01 N, facial muscle activity at 0.05–2 N) into usable electrical signals at three anatomically distinct facial sites, with a measured front-end power consumption of 4.1 µW total — more than two orders of magnitude below the PPG/EMG alternatives catalogued in Table 1. The sensor fabrication process (§3.1, Figure 2A) is described with sufficient detail for replication, including plasma etching parameters and PVD deposition specifications. The 20-participant LOSO evaluation for activity classification follows standard practice, and the Bland-Altman analysis for HR validation is appropriate. The power comparison in Table 1 and the battery-life analysis in §6.1 provide useful context for the energy budget argument. The Talk/Eat confusion (55% accuracy for Talk, 37% misclassified as Eat) is honestly reported and discussed in §6.3.

major comments (2)
  1. §4.2 (Study 2, Data Processing): The HR validation uses oracle per-participant sensor selection: 'We selected the optimal sensor channel for each user based on peak prominence to maximize heart rate estimation accuracy.' This is a post hoc best-of-three selection that requires knowledge of which sensor yields the best HR estimate. In deployment, no ground-truth HR is available to perform this selection, and no automatic selection mechanism is proposed or validated. The headline 1.82 BPM MAE and Bland-Altman limits (−5.17 to +5.58 BPM) therefore reflect an upper bound on achievable accuracy. The paper does not report per-sensor HR MAE (e.g., S1-only, S2-only, S3-only across all participants), making it impossible to assess the inflation magnitude or whether a single fixed sensor would yield acceptable accuracy. This is load-bearing for the central quantitative HR claim. The authors should
  2. §5.2, Table 2, Figure 7: The activity classification is described as 'six jaw and upper facial activities' in the abstract and contributions, but Table 2 and Figure 7 include seven classes (the sixth being 'No Activity'). The 93.8% accuracy is a 7-class figure. This should be clarified so that readers understand the headline figure includes a baseline class, and the per-class performance on the six target activities should be reported separately to allow comparison with prior work.
minor comments (8)
  1. Abstract and §1 (contributions list): The phrase 'six facial activity classes' should be reconciled with the seven-class setup in Table 2. Either clarify that 'No Activity' is excluded from the 'six' count or adjust the framing.
  2. §3.3: The sensor characterization (Figure 2C) maps force to voltage but does not specify the number of trials or measurement variability. Adding error bars or confidence intervals would strengthen the characterization data.
  3. §4.1: The HR validation study (Study 2) used only 10 participants in seated, resting conditions. While this is noted, the abstract and conclusion present 1.82 BPM MAE without this context. Consider qualifying the headline claim or noting the sample size in the abstract.
  4. §3.4: The bias voltage (V_bias) and voltage divider ratio for S3 are mentioned but specific values are not provided in the text. These should be stated for reproducibility.
  5. Table 1: The power values for comparison sensors are marked with an asterisk as 'estimated front-end power values based on components used.' The basis for these estimates should be briefly cited (e.g., specific component datasheets or prior measurements).
  6. §5.3: The user experience survey reports a 'public comfort rating of 5.5/7' for a 'lighter, compact version,' but the actual prototype used was a protoboard. This distinction should be made clearer so readers understand the ratings are for a hypothetical form factor, not the actual prototype.
  7. Figure 1: The figure caption lists sensor sites as 'nasal bridge, posterior temple, anterior temple' but the text in §3.2 refers to 'angular artery,' 'superficial temporal artery,' and 'temporalis muscle.' Aligning the anatomical and sensor-site terminology across figures and text would improve readability.
  8. §6.1: The battery life comparison states GlassTENG's front-end 'would cost the battery less than half a minute of its lifetime' but the calculation is not shown. A brief derivation (battery capacity, current draw, resulting time) would help readers verify the claim.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for a careful and constructive review. Both major comments identify legitimate issues that we will address in revision. Comment 1 (oracle sensor selection in HR validation) is correct that our current methodology reflects an upper bound on achievable accuracy; we will add per-sensor HR results and an automatic selection mechanism. Comment 2 (seven-class vs. six-class framing) is a valid clarification point; we will revise the abstract/contributions and report per-class metrics separately.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: §4.2 (Study 2, Data Processing): The HR validation uses oracle per-participant sensor selection... The headline 1.82 BPM MAE and Bland-Altman limits therefore reflect an upper bound on achievable accuracy... The paper does not report per-sensor HR MAE... The authors should [report per-sensor results and address deployment-time selection].

    Authors: The referee is correct that our current HR validation uses oracle per-participant sensor selection, and that the headline 1.82 BPM MAE therefore represents an upper bound on achievable accuracy in deployment. We agree this needs to be addressed transparently. In the revision we will: (1) report per-sensor HR MAE (S1-only, S2-only, S3-only) across all 10 Study 2 participants, so readers can assess the inflation magnitude and whether a single fixed sensor yields acceptable accuracy; (2) explicitly label the current 1.82 BPM figure as an oracle-selected upper bound in the text and in the Bland-Altman figure caption; and (3) propose and evaluate a simple automatic sensor-selection mechanism based on peak prominence computed from the TENG signal itself (no ground-truth HR required), which is the same criterion used for oracle selection but applied without knowledge of the reference. We will report the MAE under this automatic selection alongside the per-sensor and oracle results. We note that the automatic selection criterion is already signal-based (peak prominence), so a deployment-time implementation is straightforward; we simply did not validate it separately in the current manuscript, which was an oversight. revision: yes

  2. Referee: §5.2, Table 2, Figure 7: The activity classification is described as 'six jaw and upper facial activities' in the abstract and contributions, but Table 2 and Figure 7 include seven classes (the sixth being 'No Activity'). The 93.8% accuracy is a 7-class figure. This should be clarified so that readers understand the headline figure includes a baseline class, and the per-class performance on the six target activities should be reported separately.

    Authors: The referee is correct. The abstract and contributions list six activities, but the classification evaluation includes a seventh 'No Activity' baseline class, and the 93.8% accuracy is a 7-class figure. This mismatch is an oversight in how we framed the headline result. In the revision we will: (1) clarify in the abstract, contributions, and §5.2 that the 93.8% accuracy is a 7-class figure including the No Activity baseline; (2) report the 6-class accuracy (excluding No Activity) separately in Table 2 so that direct comparison with prior work reporting only target-activity classes is possible; and (3) add per-class precision, recall, and F1 for the six target activities in a supplementary table or alongside the existing confusion matrix. The confusion matrix in Figure 7 already contains the per-class information, but we will make the 6-class vs. 7-class distinction explicit in the text and table captions. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity found; one minor self-citation to prior TENG work is not load-bearing

full rationale

The paper's central claims are validated against external benchmarks: heart rate is compared to a Polar H10 chest strap (§4.1, §5.1), activity classification uses LOSO cross-validation across 20 participants (§5.2), and power consumption is measured from a physical circuit using a commercial op-amp (§3.4). The TENG sensor design derives from established triboelectric principles (PDMS/FEP contact-separation, §3.1) and is characterized via independent force-gauge measurements (§3.3). Self-citations [3,4] reference prior TENG work by author Arora, but these establish background context on self-powered sensing capabilities rather than serving as load-bearing premises for the present paper's quantitative results. The oracle sensor selection for HR estimation (§4.2) is a methodological limitation inflating the headline MAE, but it is not circular: the HR estimate is still validated against an external ground-truth device, not against the selection criterion itself. No derivation step reduces to its inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 4 axioms · 2 invented entities

The axiom ledger captures the key design decisions and assumptions that are not derived from first principles. The free parameters (bias voltage, filter cutoffs, per-user sensor selection) are engineering choices tuned to the collected data rather than derived analytically. The domain assumptions about TENG behavior at sub-0.1N forces and contact-separation reliability at arterial pulse magnitudes are the most fragile axioms, as they are assumed rather than directly verified.

free parameters (4)
  • Bias voltage (V_bias) = Not specified
    Applied to each TENG channel to shift the signal into the op-amp's operating range; value not reported.
  • Voltage divider ratio for S3 = 0.5 (halves signal)
    Chosen to prevent S3 signals from exceeding the 3.3V rail; a design decision tuned to observed signal amplitudes.
  • Filter cutoff frequencies = 0.5 Hz HP, 10 Hz LP, 20/40 Hz BS
    Selected based on PSD analysis of collected data; post-hoc choices informed by the dataset rather than derived from first principles.
  • Per-participant sensor channel selection for HR = Optimal channel per user
    Selected based on peak prominence for each participant in Study 2; a post-hoc optimization that inflates HR accuracy relative to a fixed-channel approach.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption TENG voltage output monotonically reflects applied force magnitude in the 0.01-5N range
    §3.3, Figure 2C. The sensor characterization assumes a monotonic force-voltage relationship, but the response is described as nonlinear and no hysteresis or repeatability data is presented.
  • domain assumption Vertical contact-separation TENG mode is suitable for the tiny biomechanical forces of arterial pulse (~0.01N)
    §3.1. The working principle assumes that contact-separation occurs reliably at sub-0.1N forces; whether the PDMS-FEP layers actually separate and re-contact at arterial pulse forces is not directly verified.
  • standard math The Polar H10 chest strap provides ECG-quality ground-truth heart rate
    §4.1. Cited from [10]; used as the reference standard for HR validation. Reasonable assumption supported by external literature.
  • domain assumption 30-second sliding windows provide stable pulse estimation
    §4.2. The HR comparison uses 30s windows; shorter windows might reveal instability, but this is not tested.
invented entities (2)
  • GlassTENG sensor (PDMS/Ag + FEP/Ag multi-layer TENG) independent evidence
    purpose: Transduce mechanical forces from arterial pulse and facial muscle activity into electrical signals
    The sensor is physically fabricated, characterized with a force gauge (Figure 2C), and validated in a 20-participant user study with external ground truth. Falsifiable: the force-voltage response curve can be independently measured.
  • Extended arm for S2 (superficial temporal artery sensor) independent evidence
    purpose: Maintain consistent pressure against the skin at the anterior temple
    Physically constructed and tested; however, the authors themselves note it is the least conventional element and a candidate for elimination (§6.3).

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-glm · 19588 in / 2985 out tokens · 319100 ms · 2026-07-08T03:19:02.051143+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Smart glasses maintain near-continuous skin contact at multiple arterial and muscular sites, making them a promising platform for physiological sensing. In practice, though, two factors make sustained daily wear and longitudinal deployment impractical for the quantified self: the discomfort of prolonged sensor-skin contact (e.g., gels and adhesives) and the sensor power demands that increase battery size, weight, and maintenance burden. We present GlassTENG, an ultra-low-power sensor that embeds three custom-fabricated triboelectric nanogenerators (TENGs) into a glasses frame at the angular artery on the nasal bridge, the superficial temporal artery on an extended arm, and the temporalis muscle at the temple. Each GlassTENG sensor is self-powered in transducing mechanical energy to electrical energy and consumes 1.36 $\mu$W per sensor at the analog front-end. GlassTENG enables simultaneous capture of arterial pulse waveforms, jaw kinematics (e.g., clenching, tapping, eating), and upper facial activity (e.g., blinking, eyebrow movement). In a 20-participant user study, we achieve 93.8% accuracy across six jaw and upper facial activities and estimate heart rate with a mean absolute error of 1.82 beats per minute (BPM) relative to a ground-truth chest-strap sensor in 30s windows. Together, these results establish a future pathway toward a longitudinally worn, ultra-low-power, glasses-based physiological monitoring platform.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.06509 by Jack Thoene, Jovanis Prodanich, Nabil Alshurafa, Nivedita Arora, Oscar Jakacki, Raj N. Dave, Stanley Lin, Yung-ching Lai.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: GlassTENG embeds three custom-fabricated Triboelectric Nanogenerator (TENG) sensors into everyday glasses at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: (A) Fabrication process of the triboelectric nanogenerator (TENG) sensor. (B) Working principle of the vertical contact [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Analog front-end architecture. In black is the de [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: User study protocol of Study 1, consisting of 10 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Signals from 3 sensors during 6 different activities [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

72 extracted references · 72 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Saad Ahmed, Bashima Islam, Kasim Sinan Yildirim, Marco Zimmerling, Prze- mysław Pawełczak, Muhammad Hamad Alizai, Brandon Lucia, Luca Mottola, Jacob Sorber, and Josiah Hester. 2024. The Internet of Batteryless Things.Com- mun. ACM67, 3 (Feb. 2024), 64–73. doi:10.1145/3624718

    work page doi:10.1145/3624718 2024

  2. [2]

    Emad Alyan, Stefan Arnau, Julian Elias Reiser, Stephan Getzmann, Melanie Karthaus, and Edmund Wascher. 2023. Blink-related EEG activity measures cognitive load during proactive and reactive driving.Scientific Reports13, 1 (Nov 2023), 19379. doi:10.1038/s41598-023-46738-0

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-023-46738-0 2023

  3. [3]

    Rodriguez, Gregory D

    Nivedita Arora, Ali Mirzazadeh, Injoo Moon, Charles Ramey, Yuhui Zhao, Daniela C. Rodriguez, Gregory D. Abowd, and Thad Starner. 2021. MARS: Nano- Power Battery-free Wireless Interfaces for Touch, Swipe and Speech Input. InThe 34th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology(Virtual Event, USA)(UIST ’21). Association for Computing Machi...

    work page doi:10.1145/3472749.3474823 2021

  4. [4]

    Zhang, Fereshteh Shahmiri, Diego Osorio, Yi-Cheng Wang, Mohit Gupta, Zhengjun Wang, Thad Starner, Zhong Lin Wang, and Gre- gory D

    Nivedita Arora, Steven L. Zhang, Fereshteh Shahmiri, Diego Osorio, Yi-Cheng Wang, Mohit Gupta, Zhengjun Wang, Thad Starner, Zhong Lin Wang, and Gre- gory D. Abowd. 2018. SATURN: A Thin and Flexible Self-powered Microphone Leveraging Triboelectric Nanogenerator.Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol.2, 2, Article 60 (July 2018), 28 pages. doi...

    work page doi:10.1145/3214263 2018

  5. [5]

    Christiane Attig and Thomas Franke. 2020. Abandonment of personal quan- tification: A review and empirical study investigating reasons for wearable ac- tivity tracking attrition.Computers in Human Behavior102 (2020), 223–237. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.025

    work page doi:10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.025 2020

  6. [6]

    Ritik Batra, Narjes Pourjafarian, Samantha Chang, Margaret Tsai, Jacob Revelo, and Cindy Hsin-Liu Kao. 2025. texTENG: Fabricating Wearable Textile-Based Triboelectric Nanogenerators. InProceedings of the Augmented Humans Interna- tional Conference 2025 (AHs ’25). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 124–138. doi:10.1145/3745900.3746071

    work page doi:10.1145/3745900.3746071 2025

  7. [7]

    Hymalai Bello, Sungho Suh, Bo Zhou, and Paul Lukowicz. 2024. MeciFace: Mechanomyography and Inertial Fusion-Based Glasses for Edge Real-Time Recog- nition of Facial and Eating Activities. InProceedings of the International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing and Ambient Intelligence (UCAmI 2024), José Bravo, Chris Nugent, and Ian Cleland (Eds.). Springer N...

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Jungman Chung, Jungmin Chung, Wonjun Oh, Yongkyu Yoo, Won Gu Lee, and Hyunwoo Bang. 2017. A glasses-type wearable device for monitoring the patterns of food intake and facial activity.Scientific Reports7, 1 (Jan 2017), 41690. doi:10. 1038/srep41690

    work page 2017

  9. [9]

    Jungman Chung, Wonjoon Oh, Dongyoub Baek, Sunwoong Ryu, Won Gu Lee, and Hyunwoo Bang. 2018. Design and Evaluation of Smart Glasses for Food Intake and Physical Activity Classification.JoVE132 (2018), e56633. doi:doi:10.3791/56633

    work page doi:10.3791/56633 2018

  10. [10]

    Victor Chung, Louise Chopin, Julien Karadayi, and Julie Grèzes. 2026. Validity of the Polar H10 for Continuous Measures of Heart Rate and Heart Rate Synchrony Analysis.Sensors26, 3 (Jan 2026), 855. doi:10.3390/s26030855

    work page doi:10.3390/s26030855 2026

  11. [11]

    Nicholas Constant, Orrett Douglas-Prawl, Samuel Johnson, and Kunal Mankodiya

    work page

  12. [12]

    In2015 IEEE 12th International Conference on Wearable and Implantable Body Sensor Networks (BSN)

    Pulse-Glasses: An unobtrusive, wearable HR monitor with Internet-of- Things functionality. In2015 IEEE 12th International Conference on Wearable and Implantable Body Sensor Networks (BSN). 1–5. doi:10.1109/BSN.2015.7299350

    work page doi:10.1109/bsn.2015.7299350 2015

  13. [13]

    Lovell, Derek Abbott, Kenneth Lim, and Rabab Ward

    Mohamed Elgendi, Richard Fletcher, Yongbo stone Liang, Newton Howard, Nigel H. Lovell, Derek Abbott, Kenneth Lim, and Rabab Ward. 2019. The use of photoplethysmography for assessing hypertension.npj Digital Medicine2, 1 (Jun 2019), 60. doi:10.1038/s41746-019-0136-7

    work page doi:10.1038/s41746-019-0136-7 2019

  14. [14]

    Luca Fachechi, Laura Blasi, Vincenzo Mariano Mastronardi, Massimo De Vittorio, and Maria Teresa Todaro. 2023. Effective and Accurate Approach for Measuring Key Parameters in Triboelectric Nanogenerators.IEEE Transactions on Instru- mentation and Measurement72 (2023), 1–8. doi:10.1109/TIM.2023.3328701

    work page doi:10.1109/tim.2023.3328701 2023

  15. [15]

    Feng-Ru Fan, Zhong-Qun Tian, and Zhong Lin Wang. 2012. Flexible triboelectric generator.Nano Energy1, 2 (2012), 328–334. doi:10.1016/j.nanoen.2012.01.004

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nanoen.2012.01.004 2012

  16. [16]

    Rui Feng, Fei Tang, Ning Zhang, and Xiaohao Wang. 2019. Flexible, High-Power Density, Wearable Thermoelectric Nanogenerator and Self-Powered Temperature Sensor.ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces11, 42 (Oct 2019), 38616–38624. doi:10. 1021/acsami.9b11435

    work page 2019

  17. [17]

    Branan, Andres J

    Jesse Fine, Kimberly L. Branan, Andres J. Rodriguez, Tananant Boonya-Ananta, Ajmal, Jessica C. Ramella-Roman, Michael J. McShane, and Gerard L. Coté. 2021. Sources of Inaccuracy in Photoplethysmography for Continuous Cardiovascular Monitoring.Biosensors11, 4 (Apr 2021), 126. doi:10.3390/bios11040126

    work page doi:10.3390/bios11040126 2021

  18. [18]

    John Broulidakis, Hristijan Gjoreski, and Charles Nduka

    Martin Gjoreski, Ivana Kiprijanovska, Simon Stankoski, Ifigeneia Mavridou, M. John Broulidakis, Hristijan Gjoreski, and Charles Nduka. 2022. Facial EMG sensing for monitoring affect using a wearable device.Scientific Reports12, 1 (Oct 2022), 16876. doi:10.1038/s41598-022-21456-1

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-022-21456-1 2022

  19. [19]

    Tobias Grosse-Puppendahl, Steve Hodges, Nicholas Chen, John Helmes, Stuart Taylor, James Scott, Josh Fromm, and David Sweeney. 2016. Exploring the design space for energy-harvesting situated displays. InProceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 41–48

    work page 2016

  20. [20]

    Jahan Zeb Gul, Noor Fatima, Zia Mohy Ud Din, Maryam Khan, Woo Young Kim, and Muhammad Muqeet Rehman. 2024. Advanced Sensing System for Sleep Bruxism across Multiple Postures via EMG and Machine Learning.Sensors24, 16 (2024). doi:10.3390/s24165426

    work page doi:10.3390/s24165426 2024

  21. [21]

    1937-12-01

    A B Hertzman. 1937-12-01. Photoelectric Plethysmography of the Fingers and Toes in Man.Experimental biology and medicine.37, 3 (1937-12-01)

    work page 1937

  22. [22]

    Christian Holz and Edward J. Wang. 2017. Glabella: Continuously Sensing Blood Pressure Behavior using an Unobtrusive Wearable Device. 1, 3, Article 58 (Sept. 2017), 23 pages. doi:10.1145/3132024

    work page doi:10.1145/3132024 2017

  23. [23]

    2016.TLV8801/TLV8802 320 nA Nanopower Operational Amplifiers for Cost-Optimized Systems

    Texas Instruments. 2016.TLV8801/TLV8802 320 nA Nanopower Operational Amplifiers for Cost-Optimized Systems. https://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/ tlv8802.pdf?ts=1779602202835&ref_url=https%253A%252F%252Fwww.ti.com% 252Fproduct%252FTLV8802

    work page 2016

  24. [24]

    Xingxu Jiang, Meng Chen, Wenqiu Liu, Kecen Li, Shiwei Xu, and Hua Yu. 2025. A configurable high-precision multi-parameter signal measurement method and circuit framework for triboelectric nanogenerator characterization.Nano Energy 141 (2025), 111107. doi:10.1016/j.nanoen.2025.111107

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nanoen.2025.111107 2025

  25. [25]

    Jangho Kwon, Jihyeon Ha, Da-Hye Kim, Jun Won Choi, and Laehyun Kim. 2021. Emotion Recognition Using a Glasses-Type Wearable Device via Multi-Channel Facial Responses.IEEE Access9 (2021), 146392–146403. doi:10.1109/ACCESS. 2021.3121543

    work page doi:10.1109/access 2021

  26. [26]

    Tianxing Li and Xia Zhou. 2018. Battery-Free Eye Tracker on Glasses. InPro- ceedings of the 24th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking(New Delhi, India)(MobiCom ’18). Association for Computing Ma- chinery, New York, NY, USA, 67–82. doi:10.1145/3241539.3241578

    work page doi:10.1145/3241539.3241578 2018

  27. [27]

    Jing Liu, Yi Zhang, Xia Liu, Chenming Sun, and Youquan Wang. 2025. Muscle Strength Training and Monitoring Device Based on Triboelectric Nanogenerator for Knee Joint Surgery.Micromachines16, 12 (2025). doi:10.3390/mi16121387

    work page doi:10.3390/mi16121387 2025

  28. [28]

    Shan Lu, Wenqian Lei, Lingxiao Gao, Xin Chen, Daqiao Tong, Pengfei Yuan, Xiaojing Mu, and Hua Yu. 2021. Regulating the high-voltage and high-impedance characteristics of triboelectric nanogenerator toward practical self-powered sen- sors.Nano Energy87 (2021), 106137. doi:10.1016/j.nanoen.2021.106137

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nanoen.2021.106137 2021

  29. [29]

    Saif Mahmud, Vineet Parikh, Qikang Liang, Ke Li, Ruidong Zhang, Ashwin Ajit, Vipin Gunda, Devansh Agarwal, Francois Guimbretiere, and Cheng Zhang. 2024. ActSonic: Recognizing Everyday Activities from Inaudible Acoustic Wave Around the Body.Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol.8, 4, Article 183 (Nov. 2024), 32 pages. doi:10.1145/3699752

    work page doi:10.1145/3699752 2024

  30. [30]

    Katsutoshi Masai, Yuta Sugiura, Masa Ogata, Kai Kunze, Masahiko Inami, and Maki Sugimoto. 2016. Facial Expression Recognition in Daily Life by Embedded Photo Reflective Sensors on Smart Eyewear(IUI ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 317–326. doi:10.1145/2856767.2856770

    work page doi:10.1145/2856767.2856770 2016

  31. [31]

    Matthies, Chamod Weerasinghe, Bodo Urban, and Suranga Nanayakkara

    Denys J.C. Matthies, Chamod Weerasinghe, Bodo Urban, and Suranga Nanayakkara. 2021. CapGlasses: Untethered Capacitive Sensing with Smart Glasses. InProceedings of the Augmented Humans International Conference 2021 (Rovaniemi, Finland)(AHs ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 121–130. doi:10.1145/3458709.3458945

    work page doi:10.1145/3458709.3458945 2021

  32. [32]

    Saman Naderiparizi, Mehrdad Hessar, Vamsi Talla, Shyamnath Gollakota, and Joshua R. Smith. 2018. Towards battery-free HD video streaming. InProceedings of the 15th USENIX Conference on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (Renton, WA, USA)(NSDI’18). USENIX Association, USA, 233–247

    work page 2018

  33. [33]

    Trujillo, Vere Jacobs, and Judith Holler

    Naomi Nota, James P. Trujillo, Vere Jacobs, and Judith Holler. 2023. Facilitating question identification through natural intensity eyebrow movements in virtual 7 avatars.Scientific Reports13, 1 (Dec 2023), 21295. doi:10.1038/s41598-023-48586-4

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-023-48586-4 2023

  34. [34]

    Tompkins

    Jiapu Pan and Willis J. Tompkins. 1985. A Real-Time QRS Detection Algorithm. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringBME-32, 3 (1985), 230–236. doi:10. 1109/TBME.1985.325532

    work page arXiv 1985

  35. [35]

    Vasileios Papapanagiotou, Anastasia Liapi, and Anastasios Delopoulos. 2022. Chewing Detection from Commercial Smart-glasses. InProceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Multimedia Assisted Dietary Management(Lisboa, Portugal)(MADiMa ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 11–16. doi:10.1145/3552484.3555746

    work page doi:10.1145/3552484.3555746 2022

  36. [36]

    Parag Parashar, Manish Kumar Sharma, Bishal Kumar Nahak, Arshad Khan, Wei- Zan Hsu, Yao-Hsuan Tseng, Jaba Roy Chowdhury, Yu-Hui Huang, Jen-Chung Liao, Fu-Cheng Kao, and Zong-Hong Lin. 2025. Machine learning-driven gait- assisted self-powered wearable sensing: a triboelectric nanogenerator-based advanced healthcare monitoring.J. Mater. Chem. A13 (2025), 13...

    work page 2025

  37. [37]

    doi:10.1039/D4TA07496C

    work page doi:10.1039/d4ta07496c

  38. [38]

    Polar Electro. 2023. Polar H10 Heart Rate Sensor. https://www.polar.com/us- en/sensors/h10-heart-rate-sensor/

    work page 2023

  39. [39]

    Xuecheng Qu, Jiahao Wan, Haohan Zhao, Shunyuan Xu, Xiangrong Cheng, Bo Yang, Zhibin Li, Linhong Ji, Jinting Wu, Zhou Li, Jia Cheng, and Chong Li. 2026. Closed-loop wearable neurostimulation system with triboelectric sensing to alleviate hemifacial spasms.Nature Communications16, 1 (Jan 2026), 11148. doi:10.1038/s41467-025-67121-9

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-025-67121-9 2026

  40. [40]

    Muhammad Adnan Saeed, Sang Hyeon Kim, Kiwook Baek, Jong-Woon Kim, Joo Hyun Kim, Sang Kyu Lee, and Han Young Kim. 2022. Indoor Photo- voltaic Energy Harvesting Based on Semiconducting 𝜋-Conjugated Polymers and Oligomeric Materials toward Future IoT Applications.Polymer Journal54, 12 (2022), 1469–1490. doi:10.1038/s41428-022-00727-8

    work page doi:10.1038/s41428-022-00727-8 2022

  41. [41]

    Simon Stankoski, Ivana Kiprijanovska, Martin Gjoreski, Filip Panchevski, Borjan Sazdov, Bojan Sofronievski, Andrew Cleal, Mohsen Fatoorechi, Charles Nduka, and Hristijan Gjoreski. 2024. Controlled and Real-Life Investigation of Optical Tracking Sensors in Smart Glasses for Monitoring Eating Behavior Using Deep Learning: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR Mhealth ...

    work page doi:10.2196/59469 2024

  42. [42]

    Thad Starner. 2002. The challenges of wearable computing: Part 1.Ieee Micro21, 4 (2002), 44–52

    work page 2002

  43. [43]

    Samantha Subin. 2026. Ray-Ban maker EssilorLuxottica says it more than tripled Meta AI glasses sales in 2025. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2026/02/11/ray- ban-maker-essilorluxottica-triples-sales-of-meta-ai-glasses.html

    work page 2026

  44. [44]

    Tao Sun, Yankai Zhao, Wentao Xie, Jiao Li, Yongyu Ma, and Jin Zhang. 2024. EyeGesener: Eye Gesture Listener for Smart Glasses Interaction Using Acoustic Sensing.Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol.8, 3, Article 128 (Sept. 2024), 28 pages. doi:10.1145/3678541

    work page doi:10.1145/3678541 2024

  45. [45]

    2023.MSP430FR2x3x Mixed-Signal Microcontroller Datasheet

    Texas Instruments. 2023.MSP430FR2x3x Mixed-Signal Microcontroller Datasheet. https://www.ti.com/product/MSP430FR2433

    work page 2023

  46. [46]

    The Vision Council. 2021. Vision Council of America: VisionWatch Consumer Research. https://thevisioncouncil.org. Accessed May 2026

    work page 2021

  47. [47]

    Karthikeyan V and Vivekanandan S. 2025. IoT-based triboelectric nanogenerator for wrist pulse acquisition and analysis.RSC Advances15, 5 (Jan 2025), 3592–3601. doi:10.1039/d4ra08200a

    work page doi:10.1039/d4ra08200a 2025

  48. [48]

    Nick Van Helleputte, Mario Konijnenburg, Jacopo Pettine, Dong-Woo Jee, Hye- jung Kim, Alonso Morgado, Roland Van Wegberg, Tom Torfs, Refet Mohan, Arjan Breeschoten, Chris Van Hoof, and Refet Firat Yazicioglu. 2015. A 345 𝜇W Multi- Sensor Biomedical SoC With Bio-Impedance, 3-Channel ECG, Motion Artifact Reduction, and Integrated DSP.IEEE Journal of Solid-S...

    work page doi:10.1109/jssc.2014.2359962 2015

  49. [49]

    Jie Wang, Shuo Qian, Junbin Yu, Qiang Zhang, Zhongyun Yuan, Shengbo Sang, Xiaohong Zhou, and Lining Sun. 2019. Flexible and Wearable PDMS-Based Triboelectric Nanogenerator for Self-Powered Tactile Sensing.Nanomaterials9, 9 (2019). doi:10.3390/nano9091304

    work page doi:10.3390/nano9091304 2019

  50. [50]

    Kun Wang, Yitao Liao, Wenhao Li, Yongai Zhang, Xiongtu Zhou, Chaoxing Wu, Rong Chen, and Tae Whan Kim. 2023. Triboelectric nanogenerator module for circuit design and simulation.Nano Energy107 (2023), 108139. doi:10.1016/j. nanoen.2022.108139

    work page doi:10.1016/j 2023

  51. [51]

    Lie Wang, Ye Zhang, and Peter G. Bruce. 2023. Batteries for wearables.National Science Review10, 1 (January 2023), nwac062. doi:10.1093/nsr/nwac062

    work page doi:10.1093/nsr/nwac062 2023

  52. [52]

    Wei Wang, Bingnan Cheng, Wuwei Feng, Bin He, and Shuo Liu

    work page

  53. [53]

    arXiv:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/app.54261 doi:10.1002/app.54261

    High-performance flexible piezoelectric nanogenerator with folded structure based on CNTs-modified BC 𝛽ZT/P(VDF-HFP) com- posite film.Journal of Applied Polymer Science140, 32 (2023), e54261. arXiv:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/app.54261 doi:10.1002/app.54261

    work page doi:10.1002/app.54261 2023

  54. [54]

    Zhong Lin Wang. 2013. Triboelectric Nanogenerators as New Energy Technology for Self-Powered Systems and as Active Mechanical and Chemical Sensors.ACS Nano7, 11 (November 2013), 9533–9557. doi:10.1021/nn404614z

    work page doi:10.1021/nn404614z 2013

  55. [55]

    Zhong Lin Wang, Jun Chen, and Long Lin. 2015. Progress in triboelectric nano- generators as a new energy technology and self-powered sensors.Energy Environ. Sci.8 (2015), 2250–2282. Issue 8. doi:10.1039/C5EE01532D

    work page doi:10.1039/c5ee01532d 2015

  56. [56]

    2019.World Report on Vision

    World Health Organization. 2019.World Report on Vision. Technical Report. World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241516570

    work page arXiv 2019

  57. [57]

    Wang, Wenbo Ding, Hengyu Guo, and Zhong Lin Wang

    Changsheng Wu, Aurelia C. Wang, Wenbo Ding, Hengyu Guo, and Zhong Lin Wang. 2019. Triboelectric Nanogenerator: A Foundation of the Energy for the New Era.Advanced Energy Materials9, 1 (2019), 1802906. arXiv:https://advanced.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/aenm.201802906 doi:10.1002/aenm.201802906

    work page doi:10.1002/aenm.201802906 2019

  58. [58]

    Wentao Xie, Qian Zhang, and Jin Zhang. 2021. Acoustic-based Upper Facial Action Recognition for Smart Eyewear.Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol.5, 2, Article 41 (June 2021), 28 pages. doi:10.1145/3448105

    work page doi:10.1145/3448105 2021

  59. [59]

    Hongqiang Xu, Weiqiao Han, and Mehmet Rasit Yuce. 2025. A Wearable Device with Triboelectric Nanogenerator Sensing for Respiration and Spirometry Moni- toring.ACS Sensors10, 1 (Jan 2025), 264–271. doi:10.1021/acssensors.4c02350

    work page doi:10.1021/acssensors.4c02350 2025

  60. [60]

    Junyi Yin, Vishesh Kashyap, Shaolei Wang, Xiao Xiao, Trinny Tat, and Jun Chen

    work page

  61. [61]

    Device2, 1 (2024), 100252

    Self-powered eye-computer interaction via a triboelectric nanogenerator. Device2, 1 (2024), 100252. doi:10.1016/j.device.2023.100252

    work page doi:10.1016/j.device.2023.100252 2024

  62. [62]

    Lu Yin and Joseph Wang. 2023. Wearable energy systems: what are the limits and limitations?National Science Review10, 1 (01 2023), nwac060. arXiv:https://academic.oup.com/nsr/article- pdf/10/1/nwac060/48727996/nwac060.pdf doi:10.1093/nsr/nwac060

    work page doi:10.1093/nsr/nwac060 2023

  63. [63]

    Ramtin Zargari Marandi, Pascal Madeleine, Øyvind Omland, Nicolas Vuillerme, and Afshin Samani. 2018. Eye movement characteristics reflected fatigue devel- opment in both young and elderly individuals.Scientific Reports8, 1 (Sep 2018), 13148. doi:10.1038/s41598-018-31577-1

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-018-31577-1 2018

  64. [64]

    Qing Zhang, Hiroo Yamamura, Holger Baldauf, Dingding Zheng, Kanyu Chen, Junichi Yamaoka, and Kai Kunze. 2021. Tunnel Vision – Dynamic Peripheral Vision Blocking Glasses for Reducing Motion Sickness Symptoms. InProceedings of the 2021 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers(Virtual, USA) (ISWC ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, ...

    work page doi:10.1145/3460421.3478824 2021

  65. [65]

    Rui Zhang and Oliver Amft. 2016. Bite glasses: measuring chewing using emg and bone vibration in smart eyeglasses. InProceedings of the 2016 ACM Inter- national Symposium on Wearable Computers(Heidelberg, Germany)(ISWC ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 50–52. doi:10.1145/ 2971763.2971799

    work page arXiv 2016

  66. [66]

    Rui Zhang and Oliver Amft. 2018. Monitoring Chewing and Eating in Free-Living Using Smart Eyeglasses.IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics22, 1 (2018), 23–32. doi:10.1109/JBHI.2017.2698523

    work page doi:10.1109/jbhi.2017.2698523 2018

  67. [67]

    Rui Zhang, Severin Bernhart, and Oliver Amft. 2016. Diet eyeglasses: Recognising food chewing using EMG and smart eyeglasses. In2016 IEEE 13th International Conference on Wearable and Implantable Body Sensor Networks (BSN). 7–12. doi:10. 1109/BSN.2016.7516224

    work page arXiv 2016

  68. [68]

    Tao Zhang, Chuanjie Yao, Xingyuan Xu, Zhibo Liu, Zhengjie Liu, Tiancheng Sun, Shuang Huang, Xinshuo Huang, Shady Farah, Peng Shi, Hui-jiuan Chen, and Xi Xie. 2025. Nanopores-templated CNT/PDMS Microcolumn Substrate for the Fabrication of Wearable Triboelectric Nanogenerator Sensors to Monitor Human Pulse and Blood Pressure.Advanced Materials Technologies1...

    work page doi:10.1002/admt.202400749 2025

  69. [69]

    Hongfa Zhao, Mingrui Shu, Zihao Ai, Zirui Lou, Kit Wa Sou, Chengyue Lu, Yuchao Jin, Zihan Wang, Jiyu Wang, Changsheng Wu, Yidan Cao, Xiaomin Xu, and Wenbo Ding. 2022. A Highly Sensitive Triboelectric Vibration Sensor for Ma- chinery Condition Monitoring.Advanced Energy Materials12, 37 (2022), 2201132. arXiv:https://advanced.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf...

    work page doi:10.1002/aenm.202201132 2022

  70. [70]

    Yali Zheng, Billy Leung, Stanley Sy, Yuanting Zhang, and Carmen C. Y. Poon

    work page

  71. [71]

    In2012 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society

    A clip-free eyeglasses-based wearable monitoring device for measuring photoplethysmograhic signals. In2012 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. 5022–5025. doi:10.1109/EMBC. 2012.6347121

    work page doi:10.1109/embc 2012

  72. [72]

    Zi-Bo Zhou, Tian-Rui Cui, Ding Li, Jin-Ming Jian, Zhen Li, Shou-Rui Ji, Xin Li, Jian- Dong Xu, Hou-Fang Liu, Yi Yang, and Tian-Ling Ren. 2023. Wearable Continuous Blood Pressure Monitoring Devices Based on Pulse Wave Transit Time and Pulse Arrival Time: A Review.Materials16, 6 (2023). doi:10.3390/ma16062133 8

    work page doi:10.3390/ma16062133 2023