Enhancing Indoor Navigation Accuracy with a Smartphone-Based Pedometer System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The prominence of Indoor Navigation Systems (INS) has been on an upward trajectory in recent years.While the Global Positioning System (GPS) commonly utilizes radio waves from artificial satellites for positioning information, its precision is compromised indoors due to potential radio wave obstruction by buildings.In contrast, pedometers, a critical component of INS, can provide invaluable insights into health, exercise, and user itineraries by detecting the number of steps and pinpointing optimal indoor positions.This paper proposes the development of a high-accuracy pedometer system.The proposed tracking system capitalizes on data harvested from accelerometers, sensors integrated into mobile devices, to furnish indoor tracking predicated on a straightforward pedometer approach.Online measurements and tests were conducted in residential settings, and the recorded tests were subsequently simulated offline via MATLAB.The performance of the system was evaluated in a real-world indoor residential scenario using an iPhone6 mobile device, with the discussion encompassing potential usability aspects of the approach.The devised system mitigated the drift of sensor readings by amalgamating the data from the gyroscope and accelerometer.The experimental results revealed a percentage error of 4.33% for the proposed method, translating to an error of 0.65 meters from an average walking distance of approximately 3 meters, out of 15 meters.Future research endeavors will concentrate on enhancing the accuracy of the approach by implementing data filtering and interference reduction techniques.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".