A Hybrid Method to Improve the BLE-Based Indoor Positioning in a Dense Bluetooth Environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indoor positioning using Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) beacons has attracted considerable attention after the release of the BLE protocol. A number of efforts have been exerted to improve the performance of BLE-based indoor positioning. However, few studies pay attention to the BLE-based indoor positioning in a dense Bluetooth environment, where the propagation of BLE signals become more complex and more fluctuant. In this paper, we draw attention to the problems resulting from the dense Bluetooth environment, and it turns out that the dense Bluetooth environment would result in a high received signal strength indication (RSSI) variation and a longtime interval collection of BLE. Hence, to mitigate the effects of the dense Bluetooth environment, we propose a hybrid method fusing sliding-window filtering, trilateration, dead reckoning and the Kalman filtering method to improve the performance of the BLE indoor positioning. The Kalman filter is exploited to merge the trilateration and dead reckoning. Extensive experiments in a real implementation are conducted to examine the performance of three approaches: trilateration, dead reckoning and the fusion method. The implementation results proved that the fusion method was the most effective method to improve the positioning accuracy and timeliness in a dense Bluetooth environment. The positioning root-mean-square error (RMSE) calculation results have showed that the hybrid method can achieve a real-time positioning and reduce error of indoor positioning.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".