Indoor Visible Light Localization Algorithm Based on KNN and Bayesian Algorithm
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, based on KNN and Bayesian algorithm, the basic algorithm principle of KNN (WKNN) and Bayesian is expounded. Because the KNN and Bayesian algorithm develop the signal intensity matching strategy from the perspective of mean error and probability, so one of the single algorithm can not better cope with the complex and changeable positioning scenario. For this problem, this paper proposes a new signal intensity matching criterion based on the fusion of two algorithms. The main idea of the algorithm is to change the traditional weighting method in WKNN to the weighting method considering Bayesian estimation results. In order to verify the effectiveness of the fusion algorithm, the existing visible light indoor positioning algorithm based on fingerprint recognition is compared, and the fusion algorithm based on KNN and Bayesian algorithm is proposed. This improved algorithm not only reduces the complexity of Bayesian algorithm, but also significantly improves the positioning accuracy of WKNN algorithm.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it