EMoD: Efficient Motion Detection of Device-Free Objects Using Passive RFID Tags
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Efficient and accurate tracking of device-free objects is critical for anti-intrusion systems. Prior solutions for device-free object tracking are mainly based on costly sensing infrastructures, resulting in barriers to practical applications. In this paper, we propose an accurate and efficient motion detection system, named EMoD, to track device-free objects based on cheap passive RFID tags. EMoD is the first RFID system that can estimate the moving direction as well as the current location of a device-free object by measuring critical power variation sequences of passive tags. Compared with previous solutions, the unique advantage of EMoD, i.e., the capability to estimate moving directions, enables object tracking using a much sparser tag deployment. We contribute to both theory and practice of this phenomenon by presenting the interference model that precisely explains it and using extensive experiments to validate it. We design a practical EMoD based intrusion detection system and implement a prototype by commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) RFID reader and tags. The real-world experiments results show that EMoD is effective in tracking the trajectory of moving object in various environments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".