MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Visible Light Passive Indoor Tracking Using Background Subtraction

2025· article· en· W4414405074 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Emam, Ratnasingham Tharmarasa, Steve Hranilovic

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBackground subtractionTracking (education)Kalman filterMoving target indicationPosition (finance)Object detectionImpulse responseRadar trackerTracking system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most of the currently used active visible light positioning approaches require the involvement of the target itself in the positioning and are very susceptible to changes in the background. This paper proposes a passive visible light indoor tracking approach that assumes no direct interaction between the target and the luminous elements, and is shown to be robust against background changes by introducing the concept of background subtraction (BS) to fix the issues of background changes. Using background subtraction, the background is dynamically updated without any prior information about such changes. The position estimate is determined by estimating the object impulse response (OIR) which is the reflections from the target alone after having subtracted the background from the measured impulse responses (IRs) at every time scan. Positioning is accomplished by selecting the position with the maximum likelihood (ML) between the difference signal and the OIR. A converted measurement Kalman filter (CMKF) is used for tracking the target moving under a nearly constant velocity model. The simulation results ensure accurate localization and tracking based on the proposed approach with positioning and speed RMSEs of 3 cm and 1.5 cm/s, respectively, under severe background changes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207