MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Novel Device-Free Indoor Human Localization using Wireless Radio-Frequency Fingerprinting

2021· article· en· W3202292180 on OpenAlexaff
Prasanga Neupane, Guannan Liu, Hsiao‐Chun Wu, Weidong Xiang, Shih Yu Chang, Yiyan Wu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndoor and Outdoor Localization Technologies
Canadian institutionsCommunications Research Centre Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFingerprint (computing)Computer scienceFEKOTransceiverWirelessReal-time computingTrilaterationFingerprint recognitionRandom forestReceived signal strength indicationChannel (broadcasting)Tracking (education)Radio frequencyArtificial intelligenceComputer visionAntenna (radio)TelecommunicationsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a novel device-free localization technique for human-object tracking indoors using wireless radiofrequency fingerprint. The received signal-strength indicators (RSSIs) are measured by the receiving antennae as the features for machine learning subject to the Random Forest model. In our proposed approach, both transmitters and receivers are fixed within the room, thus making human(s) free from carrying any transceiver. The placement of receivers will impact on the localization accuracy, and therefore we investigate the effect of receiver placement in this work. We will introduce an optimal receiver placement strategy such that the average communication-link distance can be minimized. Our proposed method is verified through simulations supported by a popular channel-propagation software, Feko. The pertinent experimental results demonstrate that the localization accuracy of 77.50% can be attained by our proposed Random Forest learning system for a 20 m×10 m indoor area divided into eight equi-sized zones where sixteen receiving antennae are placed at their optimal locations along the perimeter of the room.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.742
Threshold uncertainty score0.909

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIndoor and Outdoor Localization TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207