MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889917776 · doi:10.1109/msp.2018.2846804

Microlocation for Smart Buildings in the Era of the Internet of Things: A Survey of Technologies, Techniques, and Approaches

2018· article· en· W2889917776 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Signal Processing Magazine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndoor and Outdoor Localization Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeaconKey (lock)BluetoothThe InternetInternet of ThingsCover (algebra)Bluetooth Low EnergyProcess (computing)Building automation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microlocation plays a key role in the transformation of traditional buildings into smart infrastructure. Microlocation is the process of locating any entity with a very high accuracy, possibly in centimeters. Such technologies require high detection accuracy, energy efficiency, wide reception range, low cost, and availability. In this article, we provide insights into various microlocation-enabling technologies, techniques, and services and discuss how they can accelerate the incorporation of the Internet of Things (IoT) in smart buildings. We cover the challenges and examine some signal processing filtering techniques such that microlocation-enabling technologies and services can be thoroughly integrated with an IoT-equipped smart building. An experiment with Bluetooth Low-Energy (BLE) beacons used for microlocation is also presented.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.740
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.207 · 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