| Literature DB >> 29614763 |
Abstract
In wireless sensor networks, accurate location information is important for precise tracking of targets. In order to satisfy hardware installation cost and localization accuracy requirements, a weighted centroid localization (WCL) algorithm, which is considered a promising localization algorithm, was introduced. In our previous research, we proposed a test node-based WCL algorithm using a distance boundary to improve the localization accuracy in the corner and side areas. The proposed algorithm estimates the target location by averaging the test node locations that exactly match with the number of anchor nodes in the distribution map. However, since the received signal strength has large variability in real channel conditions, the number of anchor nodes is not exactly matched and the localization accuracy may deteriorate. Thus, we propose an intersection threshold to compensate for the localization accuracy in this paper. The simulation results show that the proposed test node-based WCL algorithm provides higher-precision location information than the conventional WCL algorithm in entire areas, with a reduced number of physical anchor nodes. Moreover, we show that the localization accuracy is improved by using the intersection threshold when considering small-scale fading channel conditions.Entities:
Keywords: distance boundary; distribution map; intersection threshold; test node; weighted centroid localization; wireless sensor network
Year: 2018 PMID: 29614763 PMCID: PMC5948779 DOI: 10.3390/s18041054
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Operation of the conventional weighted centroid localization (C-WCL) algorithm with a distance boundary [9,14].
Figure 2Top view of the distance error using each algorithm. (a) C-WCL; (b) test node-based WLC (T-WCL).
Figure 3Mean distance error (MDE) performance of each area according to distance boundary.
Figure 4MDE performance according to the distance boundary with the anchor node deployment interval.
Figure 5MDE performance according to the distance boundary with the test node deployment interval.
Figure 6MDE performance according to the distance boundary with the intersection threshold.