Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMendoza-Silva, Germán Martín
dc.contributor.authorTorres-Sospedra, Joaquín
dc.contributor.authorPotortì, Francesco
dc.contributor.authorMoreira, Adriano
dc.contributor.authorKnauth, Stefan
dc.contributor.authorBerkvens, Rafael
dc.contributor.authorHuerta, Joaquin
dc.date.accessioned2021-01-22T12:23:57Z
dc.date.available2021-01-22T12:23:57Z
dc.date.issued2020-09-04
dc.identifier.citationMENDOZA-SILVA, Germán Martín, et al. Beyond Euclidean Distance for Error Measurement in Pedestrian Indoor Location. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, 2020, vol. 70, p. 1-11.ca_CA
dc.identifier.issn0018-9456
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10234/191365
dc.description.abstractIndoor positioning systems (IPSs) suffer from a lack of standard evaluation procedures enabling credible comparisons: this is one of the main challenges hindering their widespread market adoption. Traditionally, accuracy evaluation is based on positioning errors defined as the Euclidean distance between the true positions and the estimated positions. While Euclidean is simple, it ignores obstacles and floor transitions. In this article, we describe procedures that measure a positioning error defined as the length of the pedestrian path that connects the estimated position to the true position. The procedures apply pathfinding on floor maps using visibility graphs (VGs) or navigational meshes (NMs) for vector maps and fast marching (FM) for raster maps. Multifloor and multibuilding paths use the information on vertical in-building communication ways and outdoor paths. The proposed measurement procedures are applied to position estimates provided by the IPSs that participated in the EvAAL-ETRI 2015 competition. Procedures are compared in terms of pedestrian path realism, indoor model complexity, path computation time, and error magnitudes. The VGs algorithm computes shortest distance paths; NMs produce very similar paths with significantly shorter computation time; and FM computes longer, more natural-looking paths at the expense of longer computation time and memory size. The 75th percentile of the measured error differs among the methods from 2.2 to 3.7 m across the evaluation sets.ca_CA
dc.format.extent11 p.ca_CA
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfca_CA
dc.language.isoengca_CA
dc.publisherInstitute of Electrical and Electronics Engineersca_CA
dc.relation.isPartOfIEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 70, 2021ca_CA
dc.rightsCopyright (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.orgca_CA
dc.rights.urihttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/*
dc.subjecterror measurementca_CA
dc.subjectindoor pathfindingca_CA
dc.subjectindoor positioning system (IPS) evaluationca_CA
dc.subjectWi-Fi fingerprintingca_CA
dc.titleBeyond Euclidean Distance for Error Measurement in Pedestrian Indoor Locationca_CA
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleca_CA
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1109/TIM.2020.3021514
dc.rights.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessca_CA
dc.relation.publisherVersionhttps://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9186638ca_CA
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionca_CA


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record