accuracy characterization for metropolitan scale wi fi localization
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Accuracy Characterization for Metropolitan-scale Wi-Fi Localization

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 15

Accuracy Characterization for Metropolitan-scale Wi-Fi Localization - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 132 Views
  • Uploaded on

Accuracy Characterization for Metropolitan-scale Wi-Fi Localization. Yu-Chung Cheng (UCSD, Intel Research) Yatin Chawathe (Intel Research) Anthony LaMarca (Intel Research) John Krumm (Microsoft Research). Introduction. Context-aware applications are prevalent M aps

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Accuracy Characterization for Metropolitan-scale Wi-Fi Localization' - eloise


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
accuracy characterization for metropolitan scale wi fi localization

Accuracy Characterization for Metropolitan-scale Wi-Fi Localization

Yu-Chung Cheng (UCSD, Intel Research)

Yatin Chawathe (Intel Research)

Anthony LaMarca (Intel Research)

John Krumm (Microsoft Research)

introduction
Introduction
  • Context-aware applications are prevalent
    • Maps
    • Location-enhanced content
    • Socialapplications
    • Emergency services (E911)
  • A key enabler: location systems
    • Must have high coverage
      • Work wherever we take the devices
    • Low calibration overhead
      • Scale with the coverage
    • Low cost
      • Commodity devices
riding the wi fi wave
Riding the Wi-Fi wave
  • Wi-Fi is everywhere now
    • No new infrastructure
    • Low cost
    • APs broadcast beacons
    • “War drivers” already build AP maps
      • Calibrated using GPS
      • Constantly updated
  • Position using Wi-Fi
    • Indoor Wi-Fi positioning gives 2-3m accuracy
    • But requires high calibration overhead: 10+ hours per building
  • What if we use war-driving maps for positioning?

Manhattan (Courtesy of Wigle.net)

why not just use gps
Why not just use GPS?
  • High coverage and accuracy (<10m)
  • But, does not work indoors or in urban canyons
  • GPS devices are not nearly as prevalent as Wi-Fi
methodology
Methodology
  • Training phase
    • Collect AP beacons by “war driving” with Wi-Fi card + GPS
    • Each scan records
      • A GPS coordinate
      • List of Access Points
    • Covers one neighborhood in 1 hr (~1 km2)
    • Build radio map from AP traces
  • Positioning phase
    • Use radio map to position the user
    • Compare the estimated position w/ GPS
downtown vs urban residential vs suburban
Downtown vs. Urban Residential vs. Suburban

Downtown

(Seattle)

Urban Residential

(Ravenna)

Suburban

(Kirkland)

evaluation
Evaluation
  • Choice of algorithms
    • Naïve, Fingerprint, Particle Filter
  • Environmental Factors
    • AP density: do more APs help?
    • #APs/scan?
    • AP churn: does AP turnover hurt?
    • GPS noise: what if GPS is inaccurate?
  • Datasets
    • Scanning rate?
compare accuracy of different algorithms
Compare Accuracy of Different Algorithms
  • Centroid
    • Estimate position as arithmetic mean of positions of all heard APs
  • Fingerprinting
    • User hears APs with some signal strength signature
    • Match closest 3 signatures in the radio map
    • RADAR: compare using absolute signal strengths [Bahl00]
    • RANK: compare using relative ranking of signal strengths [Krumm03]
  • Particle Filters
    • Probabilistic approximation algorithm for Bayes filter
baseline results
Baseline Results
  • Algorithms matter less (except rank)
  • AP density (horizontal/vertical) matters
effect of aps per scan
Effect of APs per scan
  • More APs/scan  lower median error
  • Rank does not work with 1 AP/scan
effects of ap turnovers
Effects of AP Turnovers
  • Minimal effect on accuracy even with 60% AP turnover
effects of gps noise
Effects of GPS noise
  • Particle filter & Centroid are insensitive to GPS noise
scanning density
Scanning density
  • 1 scan per 10 meters is good == 25 mph driving speed at 1 scan/sec
  • More war-drives do not help
summary
Summary
  • Wi-Fi-based location with low calibration overhead
    • 1 city neighborhood in 1 hour
  • Positioning accuracy depends mostly on AP density
    • Urban 13~20m, Suburban ~40m
    • Dense ap records get better acuracy
    • In urban area, simple (Centroid) algo. yields same accuracy as other complex ones
  • AP turnovers & low training data density do not degrade accuracy significantly
    • Low calibration overhead
  • Noise in GPS only affects fingerprint algorithms
slide15
Q & A

http://placelab.org

ad