MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390938872 · doi:10.1109/jsen.2024.3352535

A Model-Based BLE Indoor Positioning System Using Particle Swarm Optimization

2024· article· en· W4390938872 on OpenAlexaff
Yuri Assayag, Horácio A.B.F. Oliveira, Eduardo Souto, Raimundo Barreto, Richard W. Pazzi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Sensors Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndoor and Outdoor Localization Technologies
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsParticle swarm optimizationComputer scienceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indoor positioning systems (IPSs) have emerged as a research topic in mobile computing, enabling the tracking and location of mobile devices in indoor environments. In model-based IPSs, the received signal strength indicator (RSSI) is used to estimate the distance between wireless signal receivers and transmitters using signal propagation models. However, the indoor environment presents challenges that make distance estimation using RSSI difficult. In this article, we propose a new IPS that combines particle swarm optimization (PSO) with signal propagation models to improve the accuracy of mobile device positioning. The PSO algorithm is used to optimize the position estimation process by generating different particles in the map, while the signal propagation model is used to model the attenuation and reflection of wireless signals in each particle. Our MIPS-PSO system does not require any prior training nor any knowledge of the best parameters of the signal propagation model. We evaluated the performance of our system using data collected in a real indoor environment with Bluetooth-low-energy (BLE) devices. Our results show that the MIPS-PSO achieves an average error of 2.57 m, an improvement of 40% when compared to a traditional trilateration, model-based IPS.

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 score0.652
Threshold uncertainty score0.547

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations20
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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