| Literature DB >> 36173962 |
Lamya Albraheem1, Haifa Alshathri1, Raghad Alsheddi1, Ruba Alotaibi1, Ghaida Alkharashi1.
Abstract
Recently, there has been increasing interest in the field of indoor localization. This field of research can facilitate building and asset management. Although there are different technologies that can be used for localization, there are many limitations that need to be improved, and therefore there is a need to explore new technologies and alternatives that can improve indoor localization. It has been proven that visible light can be used to transfer data. A German physicist, Harald Haas, introduced the term "Li-Fi", which stands for "light fidelity", as a new technology that uses light as a medium to deliver data. Accordingly, in this study, we have proposed a hybrid asset localization system using Li-Fi and Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE). This system utilizes light-emitting diodes (LEDs) and BLE tags to detect the locations of assets in a smart building with the support of crowdsourcing technology. The system can make the management, maintenance, and localization process of equipment inside the buildings more easier. To achieve the required, the paper provides a comparison between different applications that have been developed for indoor localization using Li-Fi technology in order to highlight the limitations that need more improvement. The proposed system consists of a web-based administrator panel that allows the administrator to manage maps, assets, tags, LED lamps, and maintenance requests, as well as a mobile application that enables the user to locate, search and view asset information. In addition, the mobile application performs the process of crowdsourcing to update the assets' locations. We experimentally explore the system's functionalities and the results show that the system can accurately localize assets, and can detect Li-Fi signals from 55 lx and above within a range of 1.5 m. In addition, the BLE stickers can be detected up to 7 meters away, however, the crowdsourcing process to update the asset location is performed if the distance between the mobile application and the asset is less than or equal 1 m which gives accurate results.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36173962 PMCID: PMC9521922 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0274452
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.752
Comparisons among similar applications.
| Features | Applications | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The proposed application | Asset Tracking | Aswaaq reach | E. Leclerc | RATP | ||
| General | Platforms | Android | Android/iOS | Android | Android/iOS | - |
| Company | Proposed system | Lunera | Philips, Aisle411, Alphadata, Valuelabs And Aswaaq | Oledcomm and E. Leclerc | Oledcomm and RATP | |
| Languages | English | English | Arabic/English | French | French | |
| Technologies | Li-Fi, BLE | Wi-Fi, BLE | Li-Fi, Barcode | Li-Fi | Li-Fi | |
| Hardware | LEDs, BLE tags, Smartphone | BLE Smart lamps, BLE tags, Smartphone | LEDs, Smartphone | Li-Fi receiver, LEDs | Dongle, LEDs, Smartphone | |
| Purposes | Asset localization | User and asset localization | User localization | Trolley tracking | User localization | |
| Admin | Manage the LED | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Manage the tag | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | |
| Manage the asset | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | |
| Manage building Map | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | |
| View user feedback | Yes | No | No | No | No | |
| User | Search an asset | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No |
| View Map and location of asset | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | |
| Manage/view comments | Yes | No | No | No | No | |
| View asset information | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | |
Fig 1The proposed solution.
Fig 2Hybrid asset localization approach of Lifi and BLE.
Fig 3Use case diagram.
Fig 4GeoLiFi development kit (camera modulation).
Experiment parameters.
| Required hardware | Specifications |
|---|---|
| Power (W) | 14,8 W |
| Voltage (V) | 234,7 |
| Receiver | Phone’s camera |
| broadcasting power | –12 dbm |
| range of up to | 7 meters |
| advertising interval | 2.6 seconds |
Fig 5Web panel of the illumication system.
Fig 6The user inside the light-emitting diode (LED) range.
Fig 7Mobile application of the illumication system.
Fig 8Performance testing.
Crowdsourcing process.
| Assets ID | BLE tags | LED ID | Location | distance (m) | crowdsourcing |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | 0b441d3579a2f443 | 0x82f4 | Classroom1 | 5.62 | no |
| C2 | 31931f37b10c4ca0 | 0x6a22 | Classroom2 | 0.89 | yes |
| C3 | 69eac5b8d9d6d039 | 0x6e71 | Classroom3 | 5.01 | no |
| C4 | 83470640c8fd1998 | 0xd5d5 | Lab1 | 4.22 | no |
| C5 | 885d18d88e162b42 | 0x6390 | Lab2 | 1.26 | no |
| C6 | ad50123b84a7513d | 0xfe22 | Lab3 | 0.75 | yes |
| C7 | b10c4ca096e974f5 | 0xe212 | Lab4 | 5.96 | no |
| C8 | c212413e31931f37 | 0xed5d5 | Lab5 | 0.79 | yes |
| C9 | f2ds467e00f09ofi4 | 0xe34rt | Classroom4 | 5.01 | no |
| C10 | k823ud82e123f44e | 0x6df4 | Classroom5 | 1.00 | yes |
Fig 9The LED IDs and the distance between mobile application and assets.
Fig 10The received signal strength indication (RSSI) values of Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) tags with their distances.
Fig 11The light intensity (lx) and the distance between user and LED.
The different between the actual locations and estimated locations.
| Unknown Target Location | Actual location | Actual coordinate | Received RSSI | Distance from asset and mobile application (user) | Estimations by LiFi-based proximity technology | Localization error |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | Classroom1 | (1,1) | -99 | 5.62 | distance > 1 | ----- |
| C2 | Classroom2 | (4.5,5) | -67 | 0.89 | (5, 5) | 0.50 |
| C3 | Classroom3 | (2,5) | -97 | 5.01 | distance > 1 | ----- |
| C4 | Lab1 | (3,3) | -94 | 4.22 | distance > 1 | ----- |
| C5 | Lab2 | (2.5,3) | -73 | 1.26 | distance > 1 | ----- |
| C6 | Lab3 | (2,2) | -64 | 0.75 | (1.5,2.5) | 0.71 |
| C7 | Lab4 | (3,5) | -100 | 5.96 | distance > 1 | ----- |
| C8 | Lab5 | (2,4) | -65 | 0.79 | (2, 3) | 1.00 |
| C9 | Classroom4 | (4,1) | -97 | 5.01 | distance > 1 | ----- |
| C10 | Classroom5 | (0.5, 3) | -69 | 1.00 | (1,3) | 0.50 |
Fig 12The different between the actual locations and estimated locations.