MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7099191747

MAPPING WLAN COVERAGE AS A POTENTIAL COMPLEMENTARY SOURCE FOR GPS-BASED NAVIGATION IN INDOOR ENVIRONMENTS

2012· article· en· W7099191747 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobal Positioning SystemHybrid positioning systemLocation-based serviceRSSWirelessAssisted GPSPositioning systemPositioning technologyTransectPosition (finance)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Enhanced-positioning systems are able to support the acquisition of accurate location information using wireless technology other than the Global Positioning System (GPS). These systems have the potential to supplement GPS where GPS is unreliable. In particular, enhanced-positioning systems can provide location information for navigational support and Location Based Services (LBS) indoors and in dense urban canyons and natural environments with extreme relief. The emergence of LBS and the widespread adoption of GPS-based navigation systems are largely a result of the accuracy with which GPS devices can determine location. The purpose of this study is to validate Wireless internet access points (WiFi APs) for determining location. This research follows three steps: 1.establish the accurate WiFi position for APs; 2. plot transects of signal strength for APs; and 3. interpolate a campus signal strength map from transect data for the University of Saskatchewan campus and validate that map. This is the first step towards the development of a non-GPS location system that can provide accurate location in a fashion that can be seamlessly integrated with GPS. 1.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping→French-language works237,207→