MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400727577 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2024.3430087

Graph-Neural-Network-Based WiFi Indoor Localization System With Access Point Selection

2024· article· en· W4400727577 on OpenAlexaff
Shihui Wang, Shun Zhang, Jianpeng Ma, Octavia A. Dobre

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndoor and Outdoor Localization Technologies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial neural networkComputer networkSelection (genetic algorithm)GraphDistributed computingArtificial intelligenceTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the popularity of mobile devices and the increasing demand for indoor localization services, the localization of indoor mobile users is becoming more and more popular. However, many existing methods of building the radio map require collecting the received signal strength (RSS) of a large number of access points (APs), which causes high-hardware costs and large storage. Additionally, the instability of RSS in the actual environment will have a detrimental influence on indoor localization, and the large multistory buildings will also create new challenges. In this article, we propose a localization model with the combination of the AP selection network and the graph-based location mapping network. This model selects the optimal APs through the AP selection network and reduces the number of required APs. Then, the connection mode of the selected APs is used to construct a graph describing the location of reference points and users. Besides, the graph neural networks are used to extract graph-level representation, effectively capturing the misaligned features. Moreover, evaluated on the UJIIndoorLoc and UTSIndoorLoc data sets, the proposed method could not only reduce the number of required APs while ensuring localization performance but also outperform several state-of-the-art methods.

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 score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.650

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations32
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicIndoor and Outdoor Localization TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207