MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Enhanced Indoor Navigation System with Beacons and Kalman Filters

2018· article· en· W2918278788 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Mackey, Petros Spachos, Konstantinos N. Plataniotis

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndoor and Outdoor Localization Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeaconComputer scienceKalman filterGlobal Positioning SystemReal-time computingBluetoothWirelessUsabilityEmbedded systemTelecommunicationsArtificial intelligenceHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indoor positioning systems are used in a variety of applications from shopping malls and museums to subject monitoring and tracking. The reliability and usability of such systems are highly based on their accuracy as well as cost and ease of deployment. Although the Global Positioning System (GPS) is an accurate solution for outdoor use, it can not be used indoors. A popular approach is a wireless navigation system which makes use of Received Signal Strength Indicators (RSSI). However, signal propagation, as well as surrounding noise and a dynamic environment, can affect their performance. Recent advancements in Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) devices and the introduction of small and inexpensive beacons can alleviate the problem. In this work, we introduce an indoor navigation system with BLE beacons. To measure system accuracy an Android application was developed to collect the signal. Moreover, a Kalman filter was also developed within the application to improve the accuracy. Experimental results showed improvement of systems accuracy in three square topologies. The Kalman filter improved the accuracy up to 78.9%. while the experiments also show a correlation between the overall accuracy and how close BLE beacons are to each other.

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 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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.520
Threshold uncertainty score0.250

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations15
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIndoor and Outdoor Localization TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207