Wi-Fi based indoor location positioning employing random forest classifier
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Location positioning in indoor environments is a major challenge. Various algorithms have been developed over years to address the problem of indoor positioning. One of the most cost effective choice for indoor positioning is based on received signal strength indicator (RSSI) using existing Wi-Fi networks in commercial and/or public areas. This solution is infrastructure-free and offers meter-range accuracy. In this paper, machine learning approaches including k-nearest neighbor (k-NN), a rules-based classifier (JRip), and random forest have been investigated to estimate the indoor location of a user or an object using RSSI based fingerprinting method. Experimental measurements were carried out using 1500 reference points with received RSSIs of 86 installed APs in the second floor of Centre for Engineering Innovation (CEI) building at the University of Windsor. The results indicate that the random forest classifier presents the best performance as compared to k-NN and JRip classifiers with positioning accuracy higher than 91%.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it