Machine learning-based indoor localization and occupancy estimation using 5G ultra-dense networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nowadays, mobile applications need the location of the running devices to operate properly. This has increased the interest in indoor localization. Furthermore, the ability to sense mobile devices in indoor environments opens the door for building occupancy-count estimation. Studies have shown that occupant's detection and building occupancy-count estimation can be utilized to improve the efficiency of building operation and management. This research introduces new models to study the performance of such indoor localization and building occupancy-count estimation using the available technological advances in 5G Ultra-Dense Networks (UDNs). We propose an algorithm to collect the Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI) from User Equipments (UEs) and use it to build a fingerprinting database. We then use Machine Learning (ML) to estimate the location of the UEs in buildings from their RSSI values. Detecting users in the building is treated as a binary-classification problem. We then use various ML algorithms to build models for indoor occupancy-count estimation. Finally, the localization of users is used to estimate occupancy in specific sections of the building. The simulation results show that UDNs can provide accurate indoor localization, occupancy-count estimation in a building and in parts within the building.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".