MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112893815 · doi:10.3390/s20247003

Indoor Positioning System Using Dynamic Model Estimation

2020· article· en· W3112893815 on OpenAlexaff
Yuri Assayag, Horácio A.B.F. Oliveira, Eduardo Souto, Raimundo Barreto, Richard W. Pazzi

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndoor and Outdoor Localization Technologies
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersSamsungCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorUniversidade Federal do Amazonas
KeywordsComputer scienceComputationNode (physics)Position (finance)SIGNAL (programming language)BluetoothRSSReal-time computingSet (abstract data type)Scale (ratio)SimulationAlgorithmWirelessEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indoor Positioning Systems (IPSs) are used to locate mobile devices in indoor environments. Model-based IPSs have the advantage of not having an exhausting training and signal characterization of the environment, as required by the fingerprint technique. However, most model-based IPSs are done using fixed model parameters, treating the whole scenario as having a uniform signal propagation. This might work for most small scale experiments, but not for larger scenarios. In this paper, we propose PoDME (Positioning using Dynamic Model Estimation), a model-based IPS that uses dynamic parameters that are estimated based on the location the signal was sent. More specifically, we use the set of anchor nodes that received the signal sent by the mobile node and their signal strengths, to estimate the best local values for the log-distance model parameters. Also, since our solution depends highly on the selected anchor nodes to use on the position computation, we propose a novel method for choosing the three best anchor nodes. Our method is based on several data analysis executed on a large-scale, Bluetooth-based, real-world experiment and it chooses not only the nearest anchor but also the ones that benefit our least-square-based position computation. Our solution achieves a position estimation error of 3 m, which is 17% better than a fixed-parameters model from the literature.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicIndoor and Outdoor Localization TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207