| Literature DB >> 28029142 |
Óscar Belmonte-Fernández1, Adrian Puertas-Cabedo2, Joaquín Torres-Sospedra3, Raúl Montoliu-Colás3, Sergi Trilles-Oliver3.
Abstract
The urban population is growing at such a rate that by 2050 it is estimated that 84% of the world's population will live in cities, with flats being the most common living place. Moreover, WiFi technology is present in most developed country urban areas, with a quick growth in developing countries. New Ambient-Assisted Living applications will be developed in the near future having user positioning as ground technology: elderly tele-care, energy consumption, security and the like are strongly based on indoor positioning information. We present an Indoor Positioning System for wearable devices based on WiFi fingerprinting. Smart-watch wearable devices are used to acquire the WiFi strength signals of the surrounding Wireless Access Points used to build an ensemble of Machine Learning classification algorithms. Once built, the ensemble algorithm is used to locate a user based on the WiFi strength signals provided by the wearable device. Experimental results for five different urban flats are reported, showing that the system is robust and reliable enough for locating a user at room level into his/her home. Another interesting characteristic of the presented system is that it does not require deployment of any infrastructure, and it is unobtrusive, the only device required for it to work is a smart-watch.Entities:
Keywords: Ambient-Assisted Living (AAL); Message Queuing Telemetry Transport (MQTT) connectivity protocol; indoor positioning; machine learning
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 28029142 PMCID: PMC5298609 DOI: 10.3390/s17010036
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Percentage of Spanish population, both sexes, using Internet by year and age, over 3 moths period. First column shows total for any age within 16–74 years.
In home monitoring systems comparison.
| Cite | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ | IR, magnetic switches & ad-hoc sensor | Medium | Medium | Medium | Not specified | Yes | Yes |
| [ | IR, magnetic, body constants | Average | Medium | Ethical issues | CAN | Data level (XML) | Yes |
| [ | Wearable, environmental and cameras | Expensive | Medium | Medium | Wireless | Yes | Yes |
| [ | RFID card | Average | High | Medium | RFID | Yes | No |
| [ | Wearable camera, microphones and sensors | Expensive | High | High | ZigBee | Yes | Yes |
| [ | Wearable camera | Expensive | High | High | Not specified | No | Yes |
| [ | Capacitive sensors | Average | Low | Medium | USB | No | No |
| [ | WiFi | Cheap | High | Low | Mobile phone | Yes | Yes |
| [ | Badges | Average | Medium | Low | Ultrasounds | Yes | Yes |
| [ | Beacons and transponders | Expensive | Medium | Low | Microwave signals | Yes | Yes |
| [ | Beacons | Not provided | High | Low | Bluetooth | Proprietary | Yes |
| [ | Zigbee sensors | Expensive | Medium | Low | Zigbee | Yes | Yes |
| [ | IR | Not provided | High | Medium | Not specified | Yes | Yes |
| Ours | WiFi | Cheap | High | Low | WiFi | Yes | Yes |
Figure 2The three parts of the proposed system.
Figure 3Process for registering a new user. (a) Setting up a new user; (b) New user created.
Figure 4Devices management. (a) A name is given to the new device registered; (b) List of all devices registered.
Figure 5Process for linking a device to a user. (a) Setting up a new link; (b) Selecting a user to be linked to a device; (c) User already linked; (d) Device showing that a user is linked to it.
Figure 6Some procedure steps to map the environment and create the Machine Learning classifiers. (a) Configuration starting; (b) User asked to go to the kitchen; (c) Sampling WiFi signal strength.
Scenario characteristics, the size for each flat is given in squared meter. The total number of WAPs states for the total number of WAPs present in all samples acquired in the experiments for each scenario.
| Scenario | Size | Total Number of WAPs | Locations Mapped |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 120 | 33 | Kitchen, Office, Living-room, Bedroom |
| 2 | 80 | 36 | Kitchen, Office, Living-room, Bathroom |
| 3 | 90 | 27 | Kitchen, Office, Living-room, Bedroom |
| 4 | 80 | 43 | Kitchen, Office, Living-room, Bedroom |
| 5 | 62 | 23 | Kitchen, Office, Living-room, Bedroom |
Figure 7Scenario number 1 used in the experiments.
Performance results for the five different Machine Learning classifiers (data shown in percentages. Samples for training acquired static samples for testing too. The best result for each scenario is shown in bold.
| Scenario | Perceptron | SVM | C4.5 | Random Forest | Bayes Net | Ensemble | Ensemble(2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 78.50 ± 0.30 | 78.50 ± 0.34 | 64.00 ± 0.42 | 84.50 ± 0.22 | 83.75 ± 0.33 | 100.00 ± 0.11 | |
| 2 | 82.50 ± 0.25 | 78.00 ± 0.35 | 92.50 ± 0.25 | 85.50 ± 0.24 | 92.00 ± 0.29 | 80.50 ± 0.18 | |
| 3 | 60.75 ± 0.40 | 53.00 ± 0.39 | 49.75 ± 0.49 | 55.50 ± 0.38 | 59.25 ± 0.46 | 85.00 ± 0.26 | |
| 4 | 64.25 ± 0.38 | 74.75 ± 0.35 | 80.00 ± 0.32 | 83.00 ± 0.26 | 82.00 ± 0.35 | 97.50 ± 0.28 | |
| 5 | 80.75 ± 0.34 | 47.75 ± 0.51 | 75.50 ± 0.32 | 56.75 ± 0.43 | 80.25 ± 0.42 | 69.75 ± 0.27 | |
| Average | 75.15 ± 1.52 | 73.00 ± 1.77 | 67.10 ± 1.91 | 78.20 ± 1.43 | 79.60 ± 1.85 | 86.55 ± 1.24 | |
| 1 | 70.50 ± 0.37 | 68.75 ± 0.35 | 54.75 ± 0.47 | 80.00 ± 0.30 | 72.50 ± 0.40 | 85.75 ± 0.20 | |
| 2 | 62.25 ± 0.36 | 64.50 ± 0.37 | 73.25 ± 0.36 | 80.75 ± 0.28 | 76.75 ± 0.36 | 90.00 ± 0.17 | |
| 3 | 51.00 ± 0.43 | 61.00 ± 0.38 | 43.50 ± 0.53 | 56.50 ± 0.38 | 59.50 ± 0.41 | 70.50 ± 0.28 | |
| 4 | 78.00 ± 0.30 | 74.75 ± 0.34 | 76.25 ± 0.35 | 85.25 ± 0.26 | 87.25 ± 0.26 | 46.75 ± 0.29 | |
| 5 | 66.00 ± 0.38 | 36.50 ± 0.56 | 57.75 ± 0.37 | 54.75 ± 0.44 | 58.50 ± 0.47 | 55.25 ± 0.29 | |
| Average | 67.00 ± 1.78 | 67.00 ± 1.82 | 56.85 ± 2.27 | 73.65 ± 1.51 | 70.90 ± 1.90 | 69.65 ± 1.49 | |
| 1 | 75.50 ± 0.33 | 75.75 ± 0.35 | 76.50 ± 0.34 | 85.50 ± 0.24 | 79.50 ± 0.34 | 59.25 ± 0.16 | |
| 2 | 45.50 ± 0.48 | 43.25 ± 0.40 | 53.00 ± 0.48 | 52.75 ± 0.36 | 52.25 ± 0.46 | 59.75 ± 0.24 | |
| 3 | 78.25 ± 0.28 | 81.75 ± 0.34 | 72.25 ± 0.37 | 85.75 ± 0.24 | 86.75 ± 0.33 | 85.25 ± 0.16 | |
| 4 | 83.00 ± 0.26 | 82.50 ± 0.34 | 78.75 ± 0.31 | 92.50 ± 0.20 | 91.25 ± 0.29 | 50.50 ± 0.13 | |
| 5 | 70.25 ± 0.38 | 58.25 ± 0.36 | 56.75 ± 0.46 | 64.25 ± 0.33 | 61.50 ± 0.42 | 73.50 ± 0.23 | |
| Average | 70.10 ± 1.73 | 68.30 ± 1.79 | 67.45 ± 1.96 | 76.15 ± 1.37 | 74.25 ± 1.84 | 65.65 ± 1.61 | |
| 1 | 78.50 ± 0.31 | 80.25 ± 0.34 | 80.75 ± 0.31 | 96.50 ± 0.23 | 84.75 ± 0.30 | 91.25 ± 0.12 | |
| 2 | 38.50 ± 0.51 | 29.75 ± 0.42 | 46.00 ± 0.52 | 45.75 ± 0.40 | 33.25 ± 0.53 | 84.75 ± 0.32 | |
| 3 | 58.75 ± 0.43 | 52.50 ± 0.48 | 51.75 ± 0.39 | 57.50 ± 0.44 | 60.00 ± 0.48 | 92.75 ± 0.29 | |
| 4 | 66.50 ± 0.40 | 66.25 ± 0.37 | 59.50 ± 0.45 | 73.50 ± 0.29 | 70.50 ± 0.41 | 81.75 ± 0.21 | |
| 5 | 39.50 ± 0.39 | 37.25 ± 0.56 | 51.00 ± 0.36 | 53.50 ± 0.43 | 49.25 ± 0.48 | 52.75 ± 0.28 | |
| Average | 61.50 ± 2.04 | 55.10 ± 1.92 | 55.20 ± 2.32 | 63.70 ± 1.67 | 59.55 ± 2.20 | 80.65 ± 1.57 | |
Confusion matrix for the first scenario. The samples for training were taken with the user standing up, and also standing up for testing. The meaning of the capital letters are: L: Living-room, K: Kitchen, O: Office, B: Bathroom.
| Multilayer Perceptron | SVM | C4.5 | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| L | K | O | B | L | K | O | B | L | K | O | B | |
| L | 84 | 16 | 0 | 0 | 84 | 16 | 0 | 0 | 99 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| K | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 28 | 72 | 0 | 0 |
| O | 0 | 1 | 30 | 69 | 0 | 1 | 30 | 69 | 0 | 73 | 16 | 11 |
| B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 31 | 0 | 69 |
| L | K | O | B | L | K | O | B | L | K | O | B | |
| L | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 99 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| K | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 |
| O | 0 | 1 | 38 | 61 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 36 | 63 |
| B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
Confusion matrix for the first scenario. The samples for training were taken with the user standing up, and moving for testing. The meaning of the capital letters are: L: Living-room, K: Kitchen, O: Office, B: Bathroom.
| Multilayer Perceptron | SVM | C4.5 | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| L | K | O | B | L | K | O | B | L | K | O | B | |
| L | 69 | 31 | 0 | 0 | 69 | 31 | 0 | 0 | 89 | 11 | 0 | 0 |
| K | 1 | 99 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 99 | 0 | 0 | 39 | 61 | 0 | 0 |
| O | 0 | 1 | 14 | 85 | 0 | 2 | 15 | 83 | 0 | 12 | 15 | 73 |
| B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 92 | 0 | 46 | 0 | 54 |
| L | K | O | B | L | K | O | B | L | K | O | B | |
| L | 74 | 26 | 0 | 0 | 57 | 43 | 0 | 0 | 73 | 27 | 0 | 0 |
| K | 1 | 99 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 99 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 99 | 0 | 0 |
| O | 0 | 1 | 50 | 49 | 0 | 1 | 84 | 15 | 0 | 1 | 20 | 79 |
| B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 3 | 17 | 80 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 98 |
Confusion matrix for the first scenario. The samples for training were taken with the user moving, and also moving for testing. The meaning of the capital letters are: L: Living-room, K: Kitchen, O: Office, B: Bathroom.
| Multilayer Perceptron | SVM | C4.5 | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| L | K | O | B | L | K | O | B | L | K | O | B | |
| L | 90 | 8 | 2 | 0 | 83 | 17 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| K | 1 | 95 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 99 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 85 | 0 | 0 |
| O | 0 | 1 | 97 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 97 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 93 | 5 |
| B | 0 | 0 | 80 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 76 | 24 | 34 | 0 | 38 | 28 |
| L | K | O | B | L | K | O | B | L | K | O | B | |
| L | 99 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 98 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 98 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| K | 3 | 97 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 99 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 99 | 0 | 0 |
| O | 0 | 1 | 97 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 93 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 96 | 3 |
| B | 0 | 0 | 51 | 49 | 0 | 0 | 36 | 64 | 0 | 0 | 75 | 25 |
Confusion matrix for the first scenario. The samples for training were taken with the user moving, and standing up for testing. The meaning of the capital letters are: L: Living-room, K: Kitchen, O: Office, B: Bathroom.
| Multilayer Perceptron | SVM | C4.5 | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| L | K | O | B | L | K | O | B | L | K | O | B | |
| L | 86 | 12 | 2 | 0 | 84 | 16 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| K | 0 | 95 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 90 | 0 | 0 |
| O | 0 | 0 | 85 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 85 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 85 | 15 |
| B | 0 | 0 | 52 | 48 | 0 | 0 | 48 | 52 | 33 | 0 | 19 | 48 |
| L | K | O | B | L | K | O | B | L | K | O | B | |
| L | 97 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 96 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 98 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| K | 5 | 95 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 95 | 0 | 0 |
| O | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 85 | 15 |
| B | 0 | 0 | 6 | 94 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 39 | 61 |
Battery usage for a smart-watch running the indoor location Android application compared with a smart-watch which does not run the application. The time between measures is shown in seconds. The charge remaining is shown as a percentage of the full charge.
| Day | Time Interval | Time between Measures | Battery Charge Located | Battery Charge no-Located |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 7:30–22:00 | 60 | 16% | 87% |
| 2 | 8:30–22:30 | 60 | 29% | 90% |
| 3 | 8:00–21:30 | 60 | 5% | 75% |
| 4 | 8:00–21:30 | 120 | 20% | 75% |
| 5 | 8:00–21:30 | 120 | 24% | 74% |
| 6 | 8:00–21:30 | 300 | 40% | 67% |
| 7 | 8:00–21:30 | 300 | 41% | 74% |