A comparative analysis of wearables operating systems based on functional constraints

Amorim, Vicente J. P.; Delabrida, Saul; Oliveira, Ricardo Augusto Rabelo

doi:10.1109/ccnc.2018.8319168

Cited by 2 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…More elaborate devices can use colored displays and dedicated GPUs. Briefly, wearable devices can also be sorted into the following layers [32]:Layer 0: wearables without a display and with focus on data gathering and transmission (e.g., bio-data monitors);Layer 1: devices that use a simple display to present text and 2D graphics;Layer 2: wearables that provides interaction to the features on Layer 1;Layer 3: solutions with 3D-rendering capabilities used in augmented reality/virtual reality (AR/VR) solutions; andLayer 4: devices using artificial intelligence (AI) techniques to recognize real world objects. These solutions may use a GPU to speed-up specific tasks.…”

Section: Wearable Appliancesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As stated by authors in previous research [31,32], wearables currently vary from simple to sophisticated solutions, that may embed or not, a significant number of internal hardware components. Despite the already existent wearables classification for different contexts [23,38,97], software impact on these devices should be examined taking into account their requirements.…”

Section: Wearable Appliancesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In previous research [31,32,33], authors conducted an effort to evaluate the performance of common OSs used in wearables. A proper categorization was used as a means to segment and evaluate interesting and relevant features.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…OSs have a significant performance impact (positive or negative) when used in a wearable. A properly configured software can be around 50% more performance efficient than a conventional embedded OS [32]. If the OSs are well customized and configured, the wearable device can achieve substantial earnings without any hardware change.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The work presented in this paper takes OS performance problem into account within the wearable context. Generic solutions often present poor performance, sometimes showing a consistent discrepancy according to the analyzed variable [32]. Additionally, creating a specific OS for each wearable may not be feasible all the time.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Software and Hardware Requirements and Trade-Offs in Operating Systems for Wearables: A Tool to Improve Devices’ Performance

Amorim

Silva

Oliveira

2019

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wearable device requirements currently vary from soft to hard real-time constraints. Frequently, hardware improvements are a way to speed-up the global performance of a solution. However, changing some parts or the whole hardware may increase device complexity, raising the costs and leading to development delays of products or research prototypes. This paper focuses on software improvements, presenting a tool designed to create different versions of operating systems (OSs) fitting the specifications of wearable devices projects. Authors have developed a software tool allowing the end-user to craft a new OS in just a few steps. In order to validate the generated OS, an original wearable prototype for mining environments is outlined. Resulting data presented here allows for measuring the actual impact an OS has in different variables of a solution. Finally, the analysis also allows for evaluating the performance impact associated with each hardware part. Results suggest the viability of using the proposed solution when searching for performance improvements on wearables.

show abstract