MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7084032710 · doi:10.1109/iri66576.2025.00066

Benchmarking Transformer and Sequence Models for UWB Indoor Localization

2025· article· en· W7084032710 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Pathogenic Bacteria Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRangingKey (lock)BenchmarkingBenchmark (surveying)Impulse radioProbabilistic logicRange (aeronautics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate indoor localization is a key enabler for many intelligent systems, including autonomous vehicles, service robots, smart infrastructure, and healthcare technologies. Ultra-Wideband (UWB) technology provides high-resolution range measurements and resilience to multipath, making it well-suited for such applications. However, in cluttered indoor environments, reflected signals under non-line-of-sight (NLoS) conditions can distort range estimates. These distortions are encoded in the Channel Impulse Response (CIR), which describes how signals propagate through the environment. This paper presents a comparative benchmark of learning-based models for predicting and correcting UWB ranging errors directly from CIR data. We evaluate three neural architectures—Transformer, BiLSTM, and CNN—within a unified pipeline and integrate their predictions into a classical Weighted Least Squares (WLS) localization algorithm via adaptive error weighting. Experiments on a publicly available UWB dataset spanning four diverse environments show that the Transformer-WLS model achieves the lowest average error in three out of four settings—including 1.08 m in an industrial space—outperforming BiLSTM-WLS (1.22 m), CNN-WLS (4.01 m), and traditional WLS (<tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$\text{1. 3 3 m}$</tex>). These results highlight the effectiveness of attention-based sequence modeling for UWB localization and provide practical guidance for deploying robust learning-enhanced positioning systems in real-world environments.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.609
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPlant Pathogenic Bacteria StudiesFrench-language works237,207