MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2922879336 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2019.2940368

Recurrent Neural Networks for Accurate RSSI Indoor Localization

2019· preprint· en· W2922879336 on OpenAlexafffund
Minh Tu Hoang, Brosnan Yuen, Xiaodai Dong, Tao Lű, Robert Westendorp, Kishore Reddy

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndoor and Outdoor Localization Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNvidia
KeywordsRecurrent neural networkComputer scienceTrajectoryProbabilistic logicPosition (finance)Received signal strength indicationArtificial intelligenceSignal strengthAlgorithmArtificial neural networkReal-time computingWirelessTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article proposes recurrent neural networks (RNNs) for the WiFi fingerprinting indoor localization. Instead of locating a mobile user's position one at a time as in the cases of conventional algorithms, our RNN solution aims at the trajectory positioning and takes into account the correlation among the received signal strength indicator (RSSI) measurements in a trajectory. To enhance the accuracy among the temporal fluctuations of RSSI, a weighted average filter is proposed for both input RSSI data and sequential output locations. The results using different types of RNN, including vanilla RNN, long short-term memory (LSTM), gated recurrent unit (GRU), bidirectional RNN (BiRNN), bidirectional LSTM (BiLSTM), and bidirectional GRU (BiGRU) are presented. On-site experiments demonstrate that the proposed structure achieves an average localization error of 0.75 m with 80% of the errors under one meter, which outperforms K-nearest neighbors algorithms and probabilistic algorithms by approximately 30% under the same test environment.

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)0.002
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
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.258
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

Citations15
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicIndoor and Outdoor Localization TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207