MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3166438672 · doi:10.1109/jsen.2021.3087954

Efficient Wi-Fi Fingerprint Crowdsourcing for Indoor Localization

2021· article· en· W3166438672 on OpenAlexaff
Yongyong Wei, Rong Zheng

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Sensors Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndoor and Outdoor Localization Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRSSCrowdsourcingFingerprint (computing)Computer scienceFingerprint recognitionProcess (computing)Signal strengthSoftware deploymentGaussian processArtificial intelligencePath (computing)Data miningPattern recognition (psychology)GaussianReal-time computingWireless sensor networkComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wi-Fi Received Signal Strength (RSS, fingerprints) based indoor localization is promising and widely investigated with the pervasive deployment of Wi-Fi Access Points. However, the process to collect RSS, also known as site survey, is labor-intensive. Thus, we propose and demonstrate an efficient fingerprint crowdsourcing method in this paper. Specifically, RSS measurements are obtained and annotated with location tags while a participant is walking along a chosen path with a smartphone at hand. In the localization stage, we adopt the Gaussian Process based solution and propose a novel mean function selection method. Extensive experiments show that the path-based site survey can achieve a comparable localization performance to the point-based site survey, but takes less survey time. We find that fingerprints collected while walking are more suitable for localizing moving pedestrians. In addition, due to the sparsity of fingerprints collected through crowdsourcing, the proposed mean function selection strategy is advantageous and can reduce localization errors significantly compared to a baseline solution.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.645
Threshold uncertainty score0.645

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations32
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Sensors JournalSame topicIndoor and Outdoor Localization TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207