1 / 30

Locating in Fingerprint Space: Wireless Indoor localization with Little Human Intervention

Locating in Fingerprint Space: Wireless Indoor localization with Little Human Intervention. Zheng Yang, Chenshu Wu, and Yunhao Liu MobiCom 2012 - Sowhat 2012.08.20. Outline. Introduction System Design Evaluation Discussion Conclusion. Outline. Introduction System Design

ilyssa
Download Presentation

Locating in Fingerprint Space: Wireless Indoor localization with Little Human Intervention

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Locating in Fingerprint Space:Wireless Indoor localization with Little Human Intervention Zheng Yang, Chenshu Wu, and Yunhao Liu MobiCom 2012 - Sowhat 2012.08.20

  2. Outline • Introduction • System Design • Evaluation • Discussion • Conclusion

  3. Outline • Introduction • System Design • Evaluation • Discussion • Conclusion

  4. Motivation • RSSI fingerprinting-based localization • Site survey • Time-consuming • Labor-intensive • Vulnerable to environmental dynamics • Inevitable

  5. Objective

  6. Outline • Introduction • System Design • Evaluation • Discussion • Conclusion

  7. LiFS, System Architecture RSSI + Distance Geographical dist. ≠ Walking dist.

  8. Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) • Information visualization for exploring similarities/dissimilarities in data

  9. Stress-free Floor Plan • Geographical distance ≠ Walking distance,Ground-truth floor plan –conflict with measured distance • Sample grids in a floor plan (grid length l = 2m) • Distance matrix D = [dij],dij = walking distance between point i and j • Stress-free floor plan – 2D & 3D MDS

  10. Fingerprint Space – Fingerprint & Distance Measurement • Fingerprints and distance collection • Record while walking • Footsteps every consecutive steps by accelerometer • Set of fingerprints, F = {fi, i = 1~n}Distance(footsteps) matrix, D’=[d’ij] • Pre-processing • Merge similar fingerprints (δij<ε) • Accelerometer readingTwice integration  Distance: NoiceLocal variance threshold method  Step count • Stride lengths vary?  MDS tolerate measurement errors

  11. Fingerprint Space – Fingerprint Space Construction • Adequate fingerprints & distance • 10x sample locations in stress-free floor plan • First several days for training • d’ijunavailable  d’ij= d’ik + d’kj • Shortest path  update D’ • all-pairs of fingerprints • Floyd-Warshall algorithm • MDS  Fingerprint space 2D & 3D

  12. Mapping –Corridor & Room Recognition • Corridor recognition (Fc) • Higher prob. on a randomly chosen shortest path • Minimum spanning tree • Betweenness • Watershed • Size(corridor) / Size(all) • Large gap of betweenness values • Room recognition (FRi) • k-means algorithm(k = number of rooms) Classify fingerprints into the corridor or rooms

  13. Mapping –Reference Point • Fingerprints collected near “doors” • PD = {p1, p2, …, pk}, stress-free floor planFD , fingerprint space • distance matrix D and D’  l = (lp1, lp2, …, lp k-1)l’ = (lf1, l’f2, …, l’f k-1)cosine similarity Map near-door fingerprintsto real locations (FD→ PD) Map rooms to rooms Near-door fingerprints, FD,labeled with real locations

  14. Mapping –Space Transformation • Floor-level transformation • Stress-free floor plan ≠ Fingerprint space∵ translation, rotation, reflection • Transform matrix,xi = coordinate of fi ∈ FDyi= coordinate of pi ∈PD • For fingerprint with coordinate xreal location = sample location closest to Ax + B • Room-level transformation • Room by room • Doors and room corners as reference point • Transformation matrix

  15. Outline • Introduction • System Design • Evaluation • Discussion • Conclusion

  16. Hardware and Environment • 2 Google Nexus S phones • Typical office building covering 1600m2 • 16 rooms,5 large – 142m2, 7 small, 4 inaccessible • 26 Aps, 15 are with known location • 2m x 2m grids, 292 sample locations

  17. Experiment Design • 5 hours with 4 volunteers • Fingerprints recording – every 4~5 steps (2~3m) • Accelerometer – work in different frequency based on detecting movement • 600 user traces, with 16498 fingerprints • Corridor, >500 pathsSmall rooms, >5 pathsLarge rooms, >10 paths • Half of data used for training,half …………………... in operating phase

  18. Threshold Value of Fingerprint Dissimilarity

  19. Step Count • 5 ~ 200 footsteps • Error rate = 2% in number of detected steps • Accumulative error of long path • Unobvious performance drop • ∵ only use inter-fingerprint step counts

  20. Fingerprint Space • 795 fingerprints when ε = 30

  21. Corridor Recognition • Refining • Perform MST iteratively • Sift low betweenness • Until MST forms a single line

  22. Room Recognition

  23. Reference Point Mapping

  24. Point Mapping • 96 percentile < 4m • Average mapping error = 1.33m

  25. Localization Error • Emulate 8249 queries using real data on LiFS • Location error • Average,LiFS = 5.88mRADAR = 3.42m • Percentile of LiFS80 < 9m / 60 < 6m • Caused bysymmetric structure • Fairly reasonable! • Room error = 10.91%

  26. Outline • Introduction • System Design • Evaluation • Discussion • Conclusion

  27. Discussion • Global reference point • Last reported GPS locationLocations of APsSimilar surrounding sound signature… • Could be added in LiFS for more robust mapping • Key for symmetric floor plans / multi-floor fuildings • Large open environment

  28. Outline • Introduction • System Design • Evaluation • Discussion • Conclusion

  29. Conclusion • LiFS • Spatial relation of RSSI fingerprints + Floor plan • Low human cost • Comments • Clear architecture • Not specific descriptions in evaluation

  30. Thanks for Listening ~

More Related