This repository has been archived on 2020-04-08. You can view files and clone it, but cannot push or open issues or pull requests.
Files
OTHER2017/tex/chapters/conclusion.tex
2017-06-29 15:37:38 +02:00

63 lines
3.2 KiB
TeX
Executable File

\section{Conclusion and Future Work}
As denoted within the previous evaluations and discussions, the accuracy of
indoor localization systems based on \docWIFI{} depends on a manifold
of parameters and even minor adjustments can yield visible improvements.
Depending on required accuracy and acceptable setup- and maintenance times,
several approaches are conceivable:
If the use-case does not require utmost accuracy and the locations of permanently
installed transmitters is already well known, just using empiric model parameters
is a viable choice for many situations.
However, when combined with (particle) filtering, a heavily constrained
movement model might be a potential issue, as it can get stuck when
sensor observations or model predictions are too erroneous.
Using a small number of reference measurements to optimize the model parameters will already suffice
to improve such errors. Furthermore, it also removes the need for prior knowledge
about transmitter locations, as those can be estimated via optimization.
For the best accuracy, more complex signal strength propagation models
are required, which in turn demand for more reference measurements.
%
However, while using several instances of a simple propagation model
for different regions within a building is able to decrease the estimation
error, this approach might require prior guessing of where to place those regions.
As indicated by the error plots, just using one model for every floor within the building
seems to be a viable alternative.
More complex models, that include information about walls and other obstacles, should
be able to reduce the maximum error, which remains for some locations, at the cost of additional computations.
Special data-structures for pre-computation combined with online interpolation might
be a viable choice for utmost accuracy that is still able to run on
a commodity smartphone in real-time.
While we were able to improve the performance of the \docWIFI{} sensor component,
the filtering process should be more robust against erroneous observations.
Getting stuck should be prevented, independent of minor changes in quality for
the signal strength prediction model \cite{Fetzer-17}.
Our \docWIFI{} quality metric often was able to determine situations that
would yield multimodal or bad \docWIFI{} estimations and temporarily
ignoring this sensor prevented additional errors. Still, there were some
cases where the metric failed to correctly determine a potentially bad
observation, which leaves room for future improvements.
%100 prozent optimierung ist nicht moeglich, es gibt
%immer stellen, die, zugunsten von anderen, schlechter werden.
%es haengt auch stark davon ab, was man optimiert, das modell,
%die uebereinstimmung, welche fingerprints [schlechte vs. gute stellen]
%zudem ist das modell fuer unser gebaeude nicht gut ggeeignet.
%zu viele verschiedene materialien und trennwaende, APs immer in raeumen,
%nie auf dem flur. viele hindernisse, wenige freie raeume.
%andere modelle koennten hier helfen, erfordern dann aber zur
%aufzeit mehr berechnung, oder muessten vorab auf einem grid berechnet
%werden \todo{cite auf competition}
%besseres modell mit (leichter) interpolation zwischen den randbereichen?