| Literature DB >> 27399707 |
Dandan Wang1, Jiangwen Wan2, Meimei Wang3, Qiang Zhang4.
Abstract
Precise localization has attracted considerable interest in Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) localization systems. Due to the internal or external disturbance, the existence of the outliers, including both the distance outliers and the anchor outliers, severely decreases the localization accuracy. In order to eliminate both kinds of outliers simultaneously, an outlier detection method is proposed based on the maximum entropy principle and fuzzy set theory. Since not all the outliers can be detected in the detection process, the Maximum Entropy Function (MEF) method is utilized to tolerate the errors and calculate the optimal estimated locations of unknown nodes. Simulation results demonstrate that the proposed localization method remains stable while the outliers vary. Moreover, the localization accuracy is highly improved by wisely rejecting outliers.Entities:
Keywords: fuzzy set theory; localization; maximum entropy principle; outliers; wireless sensor networks
Year: 2016 PMID: 27399707 PMCID: PMC4970090 DOI: 10.3390/s16071041
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1The measured distance and declared anchor position is normal.
Figure 2(a) The distance-measuring process is disturbed; (b) the declared position of the anchor node is inaccurate.
The Maximum Entropy Function (MEF)-based method.
| 1: set maximum entropy factor |
| 2: calculate the lower limit of the unknown node’s coordinate |
| 3: calculate the upper limit of the unknown node’s coordinate |
| 4: calculate the initial coordinate of unknown node |
| 5: |
| 6: minimize |
| 7: //determine whether |
| 8: |
| 9: get the optimal estimated coordinate |
| 10: |
| 11: |
| 12: change the iterative number: |
| 13: change the maximum entropy factor: |
| 14: |
Default simulation parameters.
| Parameters | Values |
|---|---|
| Network size | 150 m × 150 m |
| Number of sensor nodes | 150 |
| Percent of anchor nodes | 30% |
| Communication radius ( | 30 m |
| Hop count | 2 |
Figure 3Average Localization Error (ALE) under different numbers of distance outliers.
Figure 4(a) ALE under different disturbed distance percentages when α > 0; (b) ALE under different disturbed distance percentages when α < 0.
Figure 5(a) ALE under different means of ranging errors and disturbed distance percentages; (b) Detected percent of distance outliers under different means of ranging errors and disturbed distance percentages.
Figure 6(a) ALE under different standard deviations of ranging error and disturbed distance percentages; (b) Detected percent of attacked distance estimations under different standard deviation of ranging errors and distance attacked percentages.
Figure 7(a) ALE under different iteration step length; (b) The average iteration times under different iteration step length.