1 / 26

Research at NESL and Ad-Hoc Localization

Research at NESL and Ad-Hoc Localization. Andreas Savvides Networked and Embedded Systems Lab asavvide@ee.ucla.edu http://nesl.ee.ucla.edu. Introduction to NESL. Personnel 1 faculty, 9 Ph.D. students, 5 M.S. students, 2 Undergrads Activities in following fields in EE

ocean
Download Presentation

Research at NESL and Ad-Hoc Localization

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. Research at NESL and Ad-Hoc Localization Andreas Savvides Networked and Embedded Systems Lab asavvide@ee.ucla.edu http://nesl.ee.ucla.edu

  2. Introduction to NESL • Personnel • 1 faculty, 9 Ph.D. students, 5 M.S. students, 2 Undergrads • Activities in following fields in EE • Embedded Computing Systems (Graduate) • Communications (Graduate) • Computer Engineering Option (Undergraduate) • Active participation in two new wireless-related centers at UCLA • CENS: Center of Embedded Networked Systems (NSF S&TC) • CAINS: Center of Autonomous Intelligent Networks & Systems (ONR) • Strong collaborations • CS: LECS (Estrin), WAML (Gerla), Multimedia Lab (Muntz), and ER Lab (Sarrafzadeh), • EE: SPAPL (Alwan), ICL (Villasenor) • External: USC/ISI-East • Research and teaching sponsors • Projects from DARPA, NSF, ONR, SRC • Intel equipment grants

  3. Research Activities • Energy-aware wireless communications & computation: design and tools[DARPA/PACC, ONR, SRC, NSF/CENS] • Energy-aware radio management and protocols • Dynamic power management in real-time OS and wireless SoCs • Novel wireless sensor and multimedia node architectures • Algorithms & protocols for wireless multimedia and ad hoc sensor/actuator nets [DARPA/SensIT, DARPA/PACC, DARPA/NEST, ONR, NSF/ITR, NSF/CENS] • Adaptive protocols for MAC, ad hoc routing, self-configuration, topology management, mobility management • Software services & infrastructure [ONR, DARPA/SensIT, NSF/ITR] • Agent-based programming of ad hoc wireless networks • Fine-grained localization, resource discovery, tracking, and timing synchronization • Middleware for sensor networks • Algorithms and protocols for ad hoc OFDM networks [ONR] • Efficient OFDM modeling • Algorithms for radio adaptation for energy & QoS • Channel and sub-carrier allocation • System applications of wireless technologies [NSF/ITR, NSF/CENS, ONR] • Technologies for sensor-enhanced deeply instrumented smart spaces, ecosystem monitoring, battlefield networks

  4. Prototype Tools and Platforms SensorViz SensorWare Medusa MK-2 SensorSim PALOS iBadge

  5. Smart Kindergarten Project Middleware Framework NetworkManagement SensorManagement SensorFusion Speech Recognizer Database & Data Miner Wired Network Collaboration: Muntz (CS) Alwan (EE) Potkonjak (CS) Baker (Education) WLAN Access Point High-speed Wireless LAN (WLAN) WLAN-Piconet Bridge WLAN-Piconet Bridge Piconet Piconet SensorsModules Sensor Badge Networked Toys

  6. Ad-Hoc Node Localization Techniques Locate nodes deployed in a sensor field Rapid installation and self-calibration of indoor localization systems Indoor localization in the presence of Obstacles (e.g SmartKG) Ad-Hoc Node Localization • Many Applications • Pervasive computing, sensor networks, geographic aware protocols, location based services, etc

  7. Localization Challenges • Algorithmic Challenges • Solve a large non-linear optimization problem using resource constrained microprocessors • Computation and communication challenges and energy tradeoffs (distributed, efficient and robust) • Need to operate in a multi-hop setup, deal with error propagation • Physical Effects on Ranging Measurements • Interference - transmission coordination • Multipath and shadowing effects • Other systematic error sources • Practical Challenges • Robustness, mobility support • Protocol architectures and integration, low power design • System integration challenge

  8. Problem Setup 7 1 3 8 • Assumptions • Nodes within radio range can also measure their inter node distances, measurement error is white gaussian • Some nodes are initially aware of their locations • Nodes trust each other and can collaborate with each other • Nodes do not have any angular information 4 10 9 5 14 12 2 13 15 11 6

  9. Algorithms Based On System Parameters Medusa MK-2 (A. Savvides) Ultrasonic RX/TX (Y.C. Kuan, A. Savvides) iBadge (I. Locher, S. Park)

  10. Collaborative Multilateration • Considers constraints over the whole network • Ensure that a unique position solution for each node exists before trying to solve the problem. • Need a set of initial estimates to start the estimation process • Start the position refinement – iterative least squares • Two computation models: centralized and fully distributed • Localization process overview • Nodes organize themselves into groups • Some perimeter nodes become beacons • Nodes share information about locations and measurements • Information is combined to estimate locations (AB sin a, AB cos a) (AC,0) (0,0)

  11. Computing Nodes Levels of Computation • Centralized • Only one node computes 2. Locally Centralized Some of unknown nodes compute 3. (Fully) Distributed Every unknown node computes • Each approach may be appropriate for a different application • Centralized approaches require routing and leader election • Fully distributed approach does not have this requirement

  12. PHASE 1 PHASE 2 Find nodes with unique position solutions Compute Initial Position Estimates For all nodes PHASE 3 PHASE 3 Centralized Computation Distributed Computation Communicate results to central point Communicate Compute estimate at each node Compute location estimates Criteria met? Refine estimates of under-constrained nodes NO YES Transmit estimates back to each unknown node Done Done

  13. Collaborative Subtrees (Phase 1) • Consider the single hop case: • 3 non-collinear beacons are required • Extend to multihop case: • Need at least 3 neighbors to act as anchors • Additional conditions need to be imposed • Consider the case where 3 beacons are at most 2 hops away • Derive a new set of constraints • Extend to multiple hops

  14. Initial Estimates (Phase 2) • Use the accurate distance measurements to impose constraints in the x and y coordinates – bounding box • Use the distance to a beacon as bounds on the x and y coordinates U a a a x

  15. Initial Estimates (Phase 2) • Use the accurate distance measurements to impose constraints in the x and y coordinates – bounding box • Use the distance to a beacon as bounds on the x and y coordinates • Do the same for beacons that are multiple hops away • Select the most constraining bounds Y b+c b+c c b U a X U is between [Y-(b+c)] and [X+a]

  16. Initial Estimates (Phase 2) • Use the accurate distance measurements to impose constraints in the x and y coordinates – bounding box • Use the distance to a beacon as bounds on the x and y coordinates • Do the same for beacons that are multiple hops away • Select the most constraining bounds • Set the center of the bounding box as the initial estimate Y b+c b+c c b U a a a X

  17. Initial Estimates (Phase 2) • Example: • 4 beacons • 16 unknowns • To get good initial estimates, some beacons should be placed on the perimeter of the network

  18. Computing at a Central Point beacon 1 5 4 3 6 2 Unknown location The objective function is Can be solved using iterative least squares utilizing the initial Estimates from phase 2 - we use a Kalman Filter

  19. Distributed Computation • Use an approximation method • Estimate node positions iteratively inside the network • Each node computes is location based on the currently estimated positions of its neighbors • If multilaterations follow a consistent pattern then a gradient with respect to the whole collaborative subtree is established (driven using Distributed Depth First Search) • Much less computation, similar result

  20. Distributed Computation 2 1. Obtain initial estimates 2. for each unknown 2.1: Perform Atomic Multilateration if the neighbor is beacon use beacon location else use current position estimate 2.2: Broadcast new location estimate 3. Repeat step 2 every time a new position estimate is received until the convergence criteria are met 5 3 Uncertainty of estimate after first iteration 4 Iteration 1 Uncertainty of estimate after second iteration 1 Iteration 2 The unknown nodes need to perform their atomic multilateration in the same order, driven by a Distributed Depth First Search algorithm => local computations, follow a global gradient

  21. Convergence Process • From SensorSim simulation • 40 nodes, 4 beacons • IEEE 802.11 MAC • 10Kbps radio • 40MHz processor • Average 6 neighbors per node

  22. Gains in Computation Overhead • Computation cost based on MATLAB FLOPS outputs • Result difference between centralized and distributed is very small • Mean = 0.015 mm, Standard Deviation = 0.0054mm • A group of nodes can collectively solve a non-linear optimization problem than none of the nodes can solve individually. • Distributed computation cost between 3-4 MFLOPS per node

  23. Localization Accuracy • Results obtained on a suite of 200 networks 10-200 nodes in each network • Average error over all networks was 27.7 millimeters, with a std 16mm

  24. Communication Cost and Latency • Convergence time increases with group size • Similar trend in the communication cost • Communication cost evenly distributed across all nodes • Communication cost can be further reduced by reducing group size

  25. Conclusions • Collaborative Multilateration • Reduces error propagation • It can go around obstacles – does not consider multipath effects though • Distributed version • Allows a group of nodes to solve a problem that they could not solve individually • Robust to node failures, even distribution of power consumption • Many interesting algorithms and applications • First we need to verify the test-bed • Aiming for deployment in the Smart Kindergarten

  26. Thank you! More details on NESL research http://nesl.ee.ucla.edu or visit our lab @ 1762 Boelter Hall Simulation & Visualization Hardware Platforms Algorithms Power Awareness Networked Embedded Systems

More Related