A Realistic Radar Ray Tracing Simulator for Hand Pose Imaging

With the increasing popularity of human-computer interaction applications, there is also growing interest in generating sufficiently large and diverse data sets for automatic radar-based recognition of hand poses and gestures. Radar simulations are a vital approach to generating training data (e.g., for machine learning). Therefore, this work applies a ray tracing method to radar imaging of the hand. The performance of the proposed simulation approach is verified by a comparison of simulation and measurement data based on an imaging radar with a high lateral resolution. In addition, the surface material model incorporated into the ray tracer is highlighted in more detail and parameterized for radar hand imaging. Measurements and simulations show a very high similarity between synthetic and real radar image captures. The presented results demonstrate that it is possible to generate very realistic simulations of radar measurement data even for complex radar hand pose imaging systems.Comment: 4 pages, 5 figures, accepted at European Microwave Week (EuMW 2023) to the topic "R28 Human Activity Monitoring, including Gesture Recognition

Desempenho térmico de habitação social: norma NBR 15.575

O presente artigo tem como objetivo avaliar o desempenho térmico de uma habitação de interesse social, localizada na Zona Bioclimática 2 Brasileira, através da aplicação do método de simulação da NBR 15.575 (ABNT, 2013). A concepção projetual da habitação visa proporcionar eficiência energética e melhores condições de conforto térmico aos moradores, atentando para diversos fatores, tais como: a escolha ideal dos fechamentos, orientação solar, reaproveitamento de materiais, coletor solar e cisterna. Os resultados revelaram nível mínimo de desempenho térmico na maioria dos ambientes, com exceção da sala de estar que não atingiu, no período de verão, o nível mínimo. Este dado estimula análises quanto à eficácia do método simplificado comparado ao método de simulação, também se constatou que o aumento da taxa de renovação do ar não foi expressivo, porém, o sombreamento das aberturas foi eficaz para melhores resultados.

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570