98 lines
6.7 KiB
TeX
Executable File
98 lines
6.7 KiB
TeX
Executable File
\section{Related Work}
|
|
|
|
Indoor localization based on \docWIFI{} and received signal strength indications (RSSI) dates back to the year
|
|
2000 and the work of Bahl and Padmanabhan \cite{radar}. During a one-time offline-phase, a
|
|
multitude of reference measurements are conducted. During the online-phase, where the pedestrian
|
|
walks along the building, those prior measurements are compared against live readings.
|
|
The pedestrian's location is inferred using the $k$-nearest neighbor(s) based on the Euclidean distance between currently
|
|
received signal strengths and the readings during the offline-phase.
|
|
|
|
Inspired by this initial work, Youssef et al. \cite{horus} proposed a more robust, probabilistic
|
|
approach. Their fingerprints were placed every \SI{1.52}{\meter} and estimated by scanning each location
|
|
100 times. The resulting signal strength distribution for each location is hereafter encoded by a histogram.
|
|
The latter can be compared against live measurements to infer its matching-probability. The center
|
|
of mass among the $k$ highest probabilities, including their weight, describes the pedestrian's current location.
|
|
%
|
|
In \cite{ProbabilisticWlan}, a similar approach is used and compared against nearest neighbor, kernel-density-estimation and machine learning.
|
|
Furthermore, they mention potential issues of (temporarily) invisible transmitters and describe a simple heuristic of how to handle such cases.
|
|
|
|
Meng et al. \cite{secureAndRobust} discuss several fingerprinting issues like environmental changes
|
|
after the fingerprints were recorded. They propose an outlier detection based on RANSAC to remove potentially
|
|
distorted measurements and thus improve the matching process.
|
|
|
|
Despite a very high accuracy \changed{-- up to an average error of \SI{1}{\meter} --} due to real-world comparisons,
|
|
aforementioned approaches suffer from tremendous setup- and maintenance times.
|
|
Using robots instead of human workforce to accurately gather the necessary
|
|
fingerprints might thus be a viable choice \cite{robotFingerprinting}.
|
|
Being cheaper and more accurate, this technique can also
|
|
be combined with SLAM for cases where the floorplan is unavailable.
|
|
|
|
Besides real-world measurements via fingerprinting, model predictions can be used to determine
|
|
signal strengths for arbitrary locations. Propagation models are a well-established field of research,
|
|
initially used to determine the \docWIFI{}-coverage for new installations.
|
|
While many of them are intended for outdoor and line-of-sight purposes, they are often applied to indoor use-cases as well
|
|
\cite{ANewPathLossPrediction, PredictingRFCoverage, empiricalPathLossModel}.
|
|
|
|
The model-based approach presented by Chintalapudi et al. \cite{WithoutThePain} works without any prior knowledge.
|
|
During a setup phase, pedestrians just walk within the building and transmit all observations to a central
|
|
server. Some GPS fixes with well-known position (e.g. entering and leaving the building) observed by the pedestrians
|
|
are used as reference points. A genetic optimization algorithm hereafter estimates both, the parameters for a
|
|
signal strength prediction model and the pedestrian's locations during the walk. The estimated parameters
|
|
can be refined using additional walks and may hereafter be used for the indoor localization process.
|
|
Likewise, it is possible to apply a global optimization that also determines a vague floorplan for the building \cite{crowdinside}.
|
|
|
|
% log distance model. optimization of path-loss-exponent.
|
|
% uses least-squares to solve for 3 unknowns: x, y, path-loss
|
|
% based on triangulation by converting the rssi back to a distance based on the model
|
|
% whole walk/dataset must be known beforehand?!
|
|
\changed{%
|
|
While signal strength models are used to predict a signal strength given the distance from the transmitter,
|
|
some also allow to infer the distance based on a known signal strength.
|
|
Given several signal strength measurements from transmitters at known locations
|
|
it is thus possible to perform trilateration. Such an approach is presented in \cite{rssModelOpt1},
|
|
where the pedestrian's 2D location and one model parameter are optimized using
|
|
a non-linear least square approach.
|
|
Optimizing location and model parameter together yields a setup which is invariant
|
|
to temporal environmental changes affecting the signal strength propagation.
|
|
However, all transmitters are assumed to have the same optimized model parameter, which
|
|
is an oversimplification for most environments. This issue is addressed in
|
|
\cite{autoRssModel}, where this parameter is estimated per transmitter
|
|
to increase the accuracy.
|
|
However, due to the used optimized strategy it is hard to include additional constraints,
|
|
such as knowledge given by a floorplan that would prevent the estimation from
|
|
returning unreachable areas within a building.
|
|
Likewise, the approach will not work smoothly for 3D location estimation,
|
|
as the corresponding signal strength propagation models are usually non-continuous
|
|
due to impact of floors/ceilings.
|
|
}%
|
|
|
|
\changed{%
|
|
As the presented drawbacks denote, using just \docWIFI{} signal strengths as location estimation is erroneous.
|
|
It thus makes sense to combine several other sensors
|
|
via sensor fusion, to leverage the positive aspects of each individual source.
|
|
Recursive state estimation, e.g. based on an (extended) Kalman filter, allows for combining
|
|
absolute \docWIFI{} location information, absolute landmarks, and relative pedestrian dead reckoning (PDR),
|
|
as presented in \cite{indoorKalman,indoorKalman2}.%
|
|
}%
|
|
|
|
\changed{%
|
|
Besides signal strengths, other RF characteristics
|
|
like the signal's time of arrival (TOA) and time difference of arrival (TDOA),
|
|
as used within the GPS, or its angle of arrival (AOA) can be used.
|
|
They %
|
|
}
|
|
are more accurate and mostly invariant to architectural obstacles \cite{TimeDifferenceOfArrival1, TOAAOA}.
|
|
Especially signal runtimes are unaffected by walls and thus allow for stable distance estimations, if the used components
|
|
support measuring time-delays down to a few picoseconds. This is why those techniques often need special (measurement) hardware
|
|
to estimate parameters like signal-runtime or signal-phase-shifts. Those requirements only allow for a limited number of use-cases.
|
|
|
|
We therefore focus on the RSSI that is available on each commercial smartphone, and use a
|
|
simple signal strength prediction model to estimate the most probable location given the phone's observations.
|
|
Furthermore, we propose a new model based on multiple simple ones, which will reduce the prediction error.
|
|
Several strategies to optimize simple models and the resulting accuracies are hereafter evaluated and discussed.
|
|
\changed{%
|
|
Finally, we include additional smartphone sensors using sensor fusion via recursive state estimation to
|
|
enhance the system's accuracy.
|
|
}%
|
|
|