Wireless Fingerprinting Uncertainty Prediction Based on Machine Learning
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
Although wireless fingerprinting has been well researched and widely used for indoor localization, its performance is difficult to quantify. Therefore, when wireless fingerprinting solutions are used as location updates in multi-sensor integration, it is challenging to set their weight accurately. To alleviate this issue, this paper focuses on predicting wireless fingerprinting location uncertainty by given received signal strength (RSS) measurements through the use of machine learning (ML). Two ML methods are used, including an artificial neural network (ANN)-based approach and a Gaussian distribution (GD)-based method. The predicted location uncertainty is evaluated and further used to set the measurement noises in the dead-reckoning/wireless fingerprinting integrated localization extended Kalman filter (EKF). Indoor walking test results indicated the possibility of predicting the wireless fingerprinting uncertainty through ANN the effectiveness of setting measurement noises adaptively in the integrated localization EKF.
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