MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2958552210 · doi:10.18280/rces.050203

Fingerprint positioning based on piecewise filtering of received signal strength indices and space-scene constraints

2018· article· en· W2958552210 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yong Shi, Xianjian Xiao, Fuqiang Lu, Xiaofei Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Computer Engineering Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBiometric Identification and Security
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChangzhou Institute of TechnologyNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsFingerprint (computing)Signal strengthPiecewiseComputer visionArtificial intelligenceSIGNAL (programming language)Space (punctuation)Computer scienceFingerprint recognitionPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsTelecommunicationsMathematical analysisWireless

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aims to reduce the dimensionality in fingerprint algorithm and achieve the optimal positioning accuracy at the minimal cost. For these purposes, the piecewise feature of iBeacon signal transmission was taken as the filtering factor of fingerprint positioning and adopted to filter the received signal strength indices (RSSIs) collected in real time. Then, the related fingerprints were filtered into fragments for subsequent online matching. After that, the indoor space-scene was divided into passage and hall, and the relevant constraint factor and data structure were discussed for fingerprint indexing. On this basis, the author proposed a novel method to optimize fingerprint positioning considering RSSI filtering and space-scene constraints. The experiments on an office space-scene reveal that the proposed method achieved the same result as the traditional one using 88% shorter matching time. This research provides an efficient and accuracy way of fingerprint 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 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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
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 head0.273
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Computer Engineering StudiesSame topicBiometric Identification and SecurityFrench-language works237,207