A Survey on Indoor Visible Light Positioning Systems: Fundamentals, Applications, and Challenges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The growing demand for location-based services in areas like virtual reality, robot control, and navigation has intensified the focus on indoor localization. Visible light positioning (VLP), leveraging visible light communications (VLC), becomes a promising indoor positioning technology due to its high accuracy and low cost. This paper provides a comprehensive survey of VLP systems. In particular, since VLC lays the foundation for VLP, we first present a detailed overview of the principles of VLC. Then, we provide an in-depth overview of VLP algorithms. The performance of each positioning algorithm is also compared in terms of various metrics such as accuracy, coverage, and orientation limitation. Beyond the physical layer studies, the network design for a VLP system is also investigated, including multi-access technologies, resource allocation, and light-emitting diode (LED) placements. Next, the applications of the VLP systems are overviewed. Finally, this paper outlines open issues, challenges, and opportunities for the research field. In a nutshell, this paper constitutes the first holistic survey on VLP from state-of-the-art studies to practical uses.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.005 |
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".