MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810891502 · doi:10.1109/jsen.2018.2852494

A Sensor Fusion-Based Framework for Floor Localization

2018· article· en· W2810891502 on OpenAlexafffund
Fahimul Haque, V. Dehghanian, Abraham O. Fapojuwo, John Nielsen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Sensors Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndoor and Outdoor Localization Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRSSSensor fusionComputer scienceReal-time computingKalman filterWirelessWearable computerAlgorithmHeuristicArtificial intelligenceEmbedded systemTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Floor localization is at the heart of indoor positioning systems (IPSs) in multi-storey buildings with a variety of commercial, industrial, and health and safety applications. The prevalence of wireless technologies along with the integration of micro-electro-mechanical sensors (e.g., barometers) in handheld devices and wearable gadgets of current vintage has prompted a surge in research and development efforts in the IPS area. Received signal strength (RSS) and barometric altimetry (BA) are two well-known methods of floor localization; however, RSS-based methods lack the required accuracy and BA-based methods are prone to random errors due to local changes in the air pressure, e.g., from approaching weather systems. Fusion of BA and RSS is a viable solution for floor localization; nevertheless, available fusion algorithms are rather heuristic. In this paper, a theoretical framework is developed for fusing BA and Wi-Fi RSS measurements. The proposed framework involves a novel Monte Carlo Bayesian inference algorithm, for processing RSS measurements, and then fusion with BA using a Kalman Filter scheme. As demonstrated by our experimental results, the proposed sensor fusion algorithm achieves >99% floor localization accuracy. The algorithm does not require new infrastructure and has low computational complexity, hence, can be readily integrated into various state-of-the-art mobile devices.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.238 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations35
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Sensors JournalSame topicIndoor and Outdoor Localization TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207