| Literature DB >> 25853406 |
Wendong Xiao1, Biao Song2, Xiting Yu3, Peiyuan Chen4.
Abstract
Device-free localization (DFL) is an emerging wireless technique for estimating the location of target that does not have any attached electronic device. It has found extensive use in Smart City applications such as healthcare at home and hospitals, location-based services at smart spaces, city emergency response and infrastructure security. In DFL, wireless devices are used as sensors that can sense the target by transmitting and receiving wireless signals collaboratively. Many DFL systems are implemented based on received signal strength (RSS) measurements and the location of the target is estimated by detecting the changes of the RSS measurements of the wireless links. Due to the uncertainty of the wireless channel, certain links may be seriously polluted and result in erroneous detection. In this paper, we propose a novel nonlinear optimization approach with outlier link rejection (NOOLR) for RSS-based DFL. It consists of three key strategies, including: (1) affected link identification by differential RSS detection; (2) outlier link rejection via geometrical positional relationship among links; (3) target location estimation by formulating and solving a nonlinear optimization problem. Experimental results demonstrate that NOOLR is robust to the fluctuation of the wireless signals with superior localization accuracy compared with the existing Radio Tomographic Imaging (RTI) approach.Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25853406 PMCID: PMC4431218 DOI: 10.3390/s150408072
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1DFL application scenario for aging at home.
Figure 2Affected links and outlier links.
Figure 3Distribution of the mapped distances.
Figure 4Possible location area of the target.
The notations.
| Notations | Description |
|---|---|
|
| The domain of function f |
| The first-order partial derivatives of x | |
| The Hessian matrix of function f | |
| The value of Hessian matrix |
Figure 5The experimental setup.
Running time for NOOLR in the experiment.
| Description | Mean(s) | Worst(s) | Best(s) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.5420 | 1.6051 | 1.4917 | |
| 0.0204 | 0.1244 | 0.0052 | |
| 1.5624 | 1.6973 | 1.5130 |
The parameters of RTI.
| Parameter | Value | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 0.5 | Pixel width(feet) | |
| E | 0.01 | Width of weighting ellipse (feet) |
| A | 5 | Regularization parameter |
The parameters of NOOLR.
| Parameter | Value | Description |
|---|---|---|
| −6 | The threshold for affected link detection | |
| 0.5 | The threshold for the variance |
Figure 6The errors when γ changes.
Figure 7Average errors for different γ
Figure 8Average errors for the different thresholds of variance (δ).
Figure 9Performance comparison of NOOLR, NOwoOLR, and RTI.
Performance comparison of NOOLR , NOwoOLR, and RTI.
| Algorithm | Mean (Feet) | Variance | Worst (Feet) | Best (Feet) | Median (Feet) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NOOLR | 0.7030 | 0.1210 | 1.6861 | 0.1500 | 0.6554 |
| NOwoOLR | 1.9571 | 2.1034 | 5.0493 | 0.3170 | 1.4104 |
| RTI | 0.8244 | 0.4262 | 3.8891 | 0.3536 | 0.7905 |