Audio Sample Comparison for Proximity Detection
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing methods for identifying proximate devices using sensory identifiers, such as audio or video signals, are prone to errors due to reflections and false detections, leading to incorrect identification of devices not involved in the event.
Innovation Solution
The method involves recording and comparing audio samples before and after a trigger event, such as a device tap, to determine if the audio samples are sufficiently similar, thereby establishing proximity by matching the 'audio background' of the devices, reducing false detection errors.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Ease of operation
If sensory identifiers are used to identify proximate devices, then device pairing can be initiated, but false detections occur due to reflections and echoes
Solution Approach 1:
The patent introduces audio samples as an intermediary verification layer between the sensory identifier detection and the final proximity determination. Instead of relying solely on the sensory identifier (which may be reflected or echoed), the system captures and compares audio samples from multiple devices to verify they are recording the same event, thus mediating the identification process and reducing false positives
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements feedback by comparing audio samples from different devices and using this comparison result to confirm or reject the proximity indication from the sensory identifier. The audio sample comparison provides feedback that validates whether the sensory identifier detection was a true proximity event or a false detection from reflection/echo
2Reliability
If audio samples are compared to verify proximity, then false detections are reduced, but system complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies partial action by comparing only specific portions of audio samples (those captured during a defined time window around the sensory identifier event) rather than entire audio streams. This partial comparison approach provides sufficient verification to reduce false detections while avoiding the excessive processing burden of analyzing complete audio recordings
Solution Approach 2:
The system performs preliminary action by pre-defining the time window for audio sample capture and preparation before the actual comparison takes place. Audio samples are captured and prepared in advance during a defined interval, so that when verification is needed, the comparison can proceed efficiently without ad-hoc processing
Applied Scientific Principles
This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.
Function Achieved in This Case
This approach significantly reduces false identifications by ensuring that only devices with matching audio samples are considered proximate, enhancing the reliability of device pairing and reducing erroneous detections.
Implementation Method 1
an audio recording unit for recording an audio signal so as to produce respective audio samples
Data Source
AI summary
A method of identifying at least two proximate devices (1, 2) comprises the steps of:—recording, in each device, an audio signal (AS) so as to produce respective audio samples, —detecting, in each device, a sensory identifier serving as a trigger (TR), —comparing the audio samples during a common interval (I) defined relative to the trigger (TR), and —deciding that the event is common to the devices only if the respective audio samples are sufficiently similar. The common interval (I) starts prior to the trigger (TR) and preferably also ends prior to the trigger.