MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099593333 · doi:10.1109/vtcf.2006.579

Using Antenna Array in Multipath Environment for Wireless Sensor Positioning

2006· article· en· W2099593333 on OpenAlexaff
Ji Li, Jean Conan, Samuel Pierre

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Vehicular Technology Conference · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndoor and Outdoor Localization Technologies
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultilaterationMultipath propagationComputer scienceWireless sensor networkMIMOAngle of arrivalNode (physics)Cramér–Rao boundAntenna arraySensor arraySensor nodeDirection of arrivalContext (archaeology)Real-time computingAntenna (radio)SIGNAL (programming language)WirelessKey distribution in wireless sensor networksChannel (broadcasting)Computer networkWireless networkTelecommunicationsEngineeringEstimation theoryAlgorithmGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid growth in demand for location based service has encouraged research into the performance improvement for wireless sensor positioning systems. Most of proposed localization techniques for wireless sensor networks rely on multilateration or cooperative localization. In this paper, we propose a novel approach in the context of multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) communication technique to determine the position of sensor nodes. MIMO communication systems use antenna array in both source and receive nodes to exploit the spatial properties of the multipath channel, thereby offering more information for sensor positioning. Based on estimated multipath signal parameters such as angle-of-arrival, angle-of-departure and delay-of-arrival through adaptive array signal processing techniques, the proposed approach try to minimize the errors occurring from the estimation of multipath signal parameters and gives an optimal estimation of the position of the neighbor sensor node by simultaneously resolving a set of nonlinear location equations. Computer simulations show that the position of sensor node can be determined using only one other sensor node. The mean-square errors are measured and compared with the Cramer-Rao Lower Bound to demonstrate the performance of the proposed method.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.205 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Vehicular Technology ConferenceSame topicIndoor and Outdoor Localization TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207