Invoking Deep Learning for Joint Estimation of Indoor LiFi User Position and Orientation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Light-fidelity (LiFi) is a fully-networked bidirectional optical wireless communication (OWC) technology that is considered as a promising solution for high-speed indoor connectivity. In this paper, the joint estimation of user 3D position and user equipment (UE) orientation in indoor LiFi systems with unknown emission power is investigated. Existing solutions for this problem assume either ideal LiFi system settings or perfect knowledge of the UE states, rendering them unsuitable for realistic LiFi systems. In addition, these solutions consider the non-line-of-sight (NLOS) links of the LiFi channel gain as a source of deterioration for the estimation performance instead of harnessing these components in improving the position and the orientation estimation performance. This is mainly due to the lack of appropriate estimation techniques that can extract the position and orientation information hidden in these components. In this paper, and against the above limitations, the UE is assumed to be connected with at least one access point (AP), i.e., at least one active LiFi link. Fingerprinting is employed as an estimation technique and the received signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is used as an estimation metric, where both the line-of-sight (LOS) and NLOS components of the LiFi channel are considered. Motivated by the success of deep learning techniques in solving several complex estimation and prediction problems, we employ two deep artificial neural network (ANN) models, one based on the multilayer perceptron (MLP) and the second on the convolutional neural network (CNN), that can map efficiently the instantaneous received SNR with the user 3D position and the UE orientation. Through numerous examples, we investigate the performance of the proposed schemes in terms of the average estimation error, precision, computational time, and the bit error rate. We also compare this performance to that of the k-nearest neighbours (KNN) scheme, which is widely used in solving wireless localization problems. It is demonstrated that the proposed schemes achieve significant gains and are superior to the KNN scheme.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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 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".