A Survey of Machine Learning for Indoor Positioning
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
Widespread proliferation of wireless coverage has enabled culmination of number of advanced location-based services (LBS). Continuous tracking of accurate physical location is the foundation of these services, which is a challenging task especially indoors. Multitude of techniques and algorithms have been proposed for indoor positioning systems (IPS's). However, accuracy, reliability, scalability and, adaptability to the environment still remain as challenges for widespread deployment. Especially, unpredictable radio propagation characteristics in vastly varying indoor environments plus access technology limitations contribute to these challenges. Machine learning (ML) approaches have been widely attempted recently to overcome these challenges with reasonable success. In this paper, we aim to provide a comprehensive survey of ML enabled localization techniques using most common wireless technologies. First, we provide a brief background on indoor localization techniques. Afterwards, we discuss various ML techniques (supervised and unsupervised) that could alleviate different challenges in indoor localization including Non-line-of-sight (NLOS) issue, device heterogeneity and environmental variations with reasonable complexity. The trade-offs among multitude of issues are discussed using numerous published results. We also discuss how the ML algorithms can be effectively used for fusing different technologies and algorithms to achieve a comprehensive IPS. In essence, this survey will serve as a reference material to acquire a detailed knowledge on recent development of machine learning for accurate indoor 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.
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