MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409076545 · doi:10.1109/twc.2025.3554697

Reflection Map Construction: Enhancing and Speeding Up Indoor Localization

2025· article· en· W4409076545 on OpenAlexaff
Milad Johnny, Shahrokh Valaee

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndoor and Outdoor Localization Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReflection (computer programming)Computer scienceWirelessComputer visionTelecommunicationsRemote sensingArtificial intelligenceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces an indoor localization method that utilizes fixed reflector objects within the environment, leveraging a base station (BS) or users equipped with Angle of Arrival (AoA) and Time of Arrival (ToA) measurement capabilities. The localization process consists of two phases. In the offline phase, using specific strategy effective reflector points within a specific region are identified. In the online phase, a maximization problem is solved to locate users based on BS measurements and information gathered during the offline phase. Through analysis and simulation results, we demonstrate that with the same number of training points, the performance of the proposed localization technique surpasses that of fingerprint-based techniques. Additionally, we show that localizing an unknown user does not require a large number of training points throughout the entire environment; it is sufficient to place these training points on the boundary of the environment. We introduce the reflectivity parameter ($n_{r}$), which quantifies the average number of first-order reflection paths from the transmitter to the receiver, and demonstrate its impact on localization accuracy. The log-scale accuracy ratio ($R_{a}$) is defined as the logarithmic function of the localization area divided by the localization ambiguity area, serving as an indicator of accuracy. We show that in scenarios where the Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) approaches infinity, and without a line of sight (LoS) link,$R_{a}$is upper-bounded by$n_{r} \log _{2}\left ({{1 + \frac {\mathrm {Vol}({\mathcal {S}}_{A})}{\mathrm {Vol}({\mathcal {S}}_{\epsilon }({\mathcal {M}}_{s}))}}}\right)$, where$\mathrm {Vol}({\mathcal {S}}_{A})$and$\mathrm {Vol}({\mathcal {S}}_{\epsilon }({\mathcal {M}}_{s}))$represent the areas of the localization region and the area containing all reflector points with a probability of at least$1 - \epsilon $, respectively.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Wireless CommunicationsSame topicIndoor and Outdoor Localization TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207