The invention relates generally to indoor localization, and more particularly to unsupervised localization of a device using received signal strength (RSS) measurements.
Accurate indoor localization using a satellite based Global Positioning System (GPS) is difficult to achieve because the GPS signals are attenuated when the signals propagate through obstacles, such as roof, floors, walls and furnishing Consequently, the signal strength becomes too low for localization in indoor environments.
A number of methods and systems are known for indoor localization. Most prior art techniques require that specialized hardware is installed in the environment. Although those methods achieve accurate localization, the necessity for installing the hardware is seen as a huge disadvantage from cost, maintanance and complexity perspectives.
Methods that solely rely on conventional Wi-Fi chipsets for indoor localization use measured received signal strength (RSS) levels obtained from the Wi-Fi chipsets. Most of the prior art techniques require training, which includes measuring the RSS levels offline in the indoor environment. These measurements are then supplied to the localization method during online use.
The main limitation associated with the training is in that the offline measurements are unreliable. This is because the RSS levels in the environment vary dynamically over time, for example, due to changes in the number of occupants, the furnishing and locations of the APs. This implies that the training needs to be repeated whenever the environment changes.
U.S. Pat. No. 7,317,419 describes a method for localizing a target device at an unknown location based on the RSS measurements obtained at sensors whose locations are known. The method utilizes a path loss model, where a value of path loss exponent depends on the distances between the transmitter and receiver and some features of the indoor environment.
U.S. Pat. No. 8,077,090 describes a method in which mobile devices report the RSS values to a central server and, if available, a GPS based location estimate. The central server constructs a radio map of an indoor environment. Path loss coefficients, transmitted powers and locations of a number of devices are determined simultaneously by solving a system of equations. The number of access points needs to be large enough to support estimation of large number of parameters.
U.S. Publication 20120129546 uses a difference between the RSS measurements obtained at two consecutive locations to infer the most probable path traversed between these two points. Different constraints on path can be imposed.
U.S. Pat. No. 8,879,607 describes a method that performs indoor localization using the path loss model and RSS measurements at Rake receiver. The receiver extracts the strongest arrival and assigns path loss coefficient corresponding to a free space propagation. There is also a possibility of setting the path loss coefficient corresponding to the strongest arrival based on the type of the building and carrier radio frequency.
U.S. Pat. No. 8,264,402 describes a method that performs indoor localization using the RSS measurements and path loss model. The locations and reference signal levels of the access points are known and used to calibrate path loss coefficients between access points. Thus obtained path loss coefficients are used in some weighted sums to estimate path loss coefficients between an unknown location and access points. The unknown location is finally estimated from the obtained path loss coefficient and measured RSS levels.
Therefore, it is desired to perform RSS based localization in an unsupervised manner, i.e., without training.
The embodiments of the invention provide a method for localization of a device by measuring received signal strength (RSS) levels of reference signals transmitted by a set of access points (APs) arranged in an enclosed environment. The RSS levels of the reference signals at the APs are known and supplied to the method. The method relies on a conventional Wi-Fi chipset and does not require any changes in that hardware. Also, the method is unsupervised, i.e., the method does not require training.
The method uses a path loss model for the RSS level. The log-distance path loss model is a radio propagation model that predicts path loss a signal encounters in an enclosed environment as a function of distance. According to this model, the RSS level of the received reference signals transmitted by a particular AP depends on a distance to the AP and the associated path loss coefficient. The path loss coefficient is an unknown model parameter. Note that there is a single model parameter for each AP.
Given the RSS levels, the method jointly estimates the path loss coefficients, one for each AP. The procedure uses expectation maximization (EM) where the unknown location is a deterministic unknown parameter. The path loss coefficient is modeled as a discrete random variable, which takes values from a finite alphabet .
In the basic version, the method is initialized with a uniform distribution of path loss coefficients. However, if the location changes continuously, as is usually the case, the location estimate in a previous time step is used to initialize the estimation during a current time step. In addition, an estimate of the change in location coordinates between two consecutive time steps, along with the location estimate from previous time step, can be used to initialize the current estimation procedure.
The measurement of the change in coordinates between two time instants can be obtained from an inertial measurement unit (IMU), which is nowadays available on most devices. The IMU measures velocity, orientation, and gravitational forces. However, IMUs only collect short term data and suffer from accumulated error.
Finally, one form of non-linear Kalman filtering, which use the location estimate from previous time step and measurement of the change in coordinates (provided by the IMU) is also provided with the goal to achieve better location accuracy by fusing the RSS and IMU measurements in an intelligent fashion.
The embodiments of our invention provide methods 200, 300, 400 and 500 (see
Our methods localize the device 120 using received signal strength (RSS) levels 121 of reference signals transmitted by the APs 110, as shown in
A location of the jth AP 110 in this coordinate system is denoted as xj 113, where j=1, . . . , N. The AP j is characterized by reference received signal strength (RSS) level zjR 112 at a radial distance d0 111 from the AP. The locations xj and the reference RSS levels zjR at the distance d0 from the AP are known.
The RSS levels of the reference signals received from access point j by the receiver at some unknown location x 120 are denoted by zj 121, where j=1, . . . , N. A path loss model describes a relation between the RSS measurement zj and location position x as
where hj is path loss coefficient and vj is noise. The path loss coefficient quantifies reduction in the RSS level as the distance of the measurement location from the access point increases. In a free space propagation environment, h=2. The path loss coefficient has higher values in more complicated settings such as enclosed environments. The model expressed by equation (1) assumes that there is a single static pathloss coefficient pertaining to each AP and at each location in the environment.
Given the RSS measurements zj, j=1, . . . , N, taken at the unknown location x, our goal is to estimate the coordinates of the location x using the path loss model in eq. (1). In the following, we first consider the case when the path loss coefficients are known, and then describe a more realistic case when they are unknown.
Known Path Losses
We assume that noise vj in equation (1) has a Gaussian distribution with zero mean and variance σv2. Therefore, the RSS measurement conditioned on path loss coefficient hj, is Gaussian distributed,
A joint log-likelihood of the RSS levels received from all access points and conditioned on path loss coefficients is given by
where we have used the assumption of independence between RSS measurements from the N access points to obtain the right hand side of equation (3). Hence, the maximum likelihood (ML) location estimate x is
Unknown Path Losses
The path loss coefficients are unknown and location dependent because a single obstacle, e.g., the wall 140 in
In general, the path loss coefficient is a continuos variable. However, for the reasons described below, we model the path loss coefficient as a discrete random variable taking values from a finite alphabet . The probability distribution of the path loss coefficient corresponding to AP j is denoted by pj(h), where j=1, . . . , N and hε.
Without loss of generality, we implicitly assume that path loss coefficients corresponding to different APs take values from the same alphabet . The size of alphabet should be large enough such that the measured RSS could be explained with the path loss model in eq. (1). On the other hand, the computational complexity increases with the size of .
Given this setup, the EM procedure is used to iteratively estimate path loss coefficients and unknown location. This is performed in the method 200 whose block diagram is shown in
where || is the cardinality of the finite alphabet. This initialization of the iteration counter k and probability distributions are performed, respectively, in 210 and 220 of
The EM procedure consists of iterating between estimating the location using the probability distribution of path loss coefficients in 230, and computing the probability distribution of path loss coefficients using the location estimate in 240. The details of these steps follow.
The estimation step of the kth iteration of the EM procedure evaluates the expectation of the log-likelihood of the measured RSS levels with respect to probability distribution of model parameters, obtained in the previous iteration. Thus, taking the expectation in eq. (3) and treating the path loss coefficients hj as random variables with distributions pj(k-1)(h), j=1, . . . , N, evaluated in iteration k−1, the expected joint log-likelihood of the measured RSS levels is given by
The estimate of the unknown location at iteration k is updated in 230 of
This optimization problem is solved by using one of the gradient based optimization techniques, e.g., see Bersekas, Nonlinear Programming, Athena Scientific, 2nd edition, 1999. Note that the objective function in equation (7) admits closed form expressions for the gradient and a Hessian matrix. The objective function is non-convex. This can be partially overcome by initializing a certain number of optimization procedures with different points and performing the optimization procedures in parallel. After convergence of all of the procedures, the solution that minimizes the objective function is selected as the final estimate.
To compute the probability distribution of path loss coefficient corresponding to AP j, pj(h), the posterior distribution of path loss coefficient hj, conditioned on the RSS measurement zj, is up to a normalization constant given by the Bayes' rule as
ph
where pz|h
where hεand j=1, . . . , N. The final estimate of the probability distribution correspondent to path loss coefficient hj is obtained after normalization. The probability distributions of path loss coefficients are computed in step 240 of
The EM procedure is performed until a termination condition is satisfied, e.g., a predefined number Imax of iterations is reached. This condition is checked in 250 of
Overall, using the measured RSS levels, and the final path loss coefficients, an estimate {circumflex over (x)} of the location can be produced. The steps of the method can be performed in the processor of the device. The location estimate is the output 202 from the method, as shown in
Consecutive Locations
The localization method described above estimates a single unknown location based on RSS measurements taken at that location. However, it is very likely that the localization requests come from a mobile device in consecutive and relatively densely spaced time instants.
For example as shown in
To incorporate the time in the presented framework, we respectively denote with x(n) and zj(n) an unknown location and RSS level from the jth AP at a discrete time n. Similarly, {circumflex over (x)}(n) is the estimate of the location at time n. The locations of the APs xj and the corresponding reference signal levels zjR are again assumed to be fixed and known.
Initialization Using Previous Location Estimate
Methods 300 and 400, whose block diagrams are shown in
An immediate consequence of estimating consecutive locations is to use location estimates from previous time instant in order to initialize the distributions of path loss coefficients at a current time instant. Suppose that we are at time n, and have access to estimate {circumflex over (x)}(n−1) from time n−1. Then, with the same reasoning as used in deriving eq. (9), the probability distribution of path loss coefficient hj, at time n, is up to the normalization constant initialized with
where hε, j=1, . . . , N. Note that we suppress time index n in pj(0)(h) to simplify the notation. The probability distribution is computed as previously described for step 240. The method 300 further proceeds very much the same as method 200 by iteratively estimating the location in 230, checking the termination criterion in 250, updating the probability distributions of path loss coefficients in 240. The method outputs the final location estimate in step 202.
Another starting point for the EM procedure can be obtained when the measurement of the change in the location coordinates between two consecutive localization requests is available
Δx(n)=x(n)−x(n−1). (11)
The coordinate change can be computed from the measurements of the IMU 410, as shown in
Using the estimate of the change in location coordinates and the previous location estimate, the current location is first predicted by summing these estimates. This is performed in 420 (
Method 400, summarized in
where hε, j=1, . . . , N. These distributions are computed in 320 (more precisely in 230 within 320). Other steps inherent to the basic EM procedure are also executed in corresponding blocks in 320. The method outputs the final location estimate in 202.
As shown in the pseudocode in
Processing Consecutive Estimates
The above method uses the IMU estimate of the change in location coordinates to initialize probability distributions of path loss coefficients. The IMU estimate can also be used to formulate a linear model for dynamics of the locations,
x(n)=x(n−1)+Δx(n)+q(n), (13)
where q(n) is an additive white Gaussian noise which models the IMU estimation error. We assume the error has a zero mean and a variance σ02 in each coordinate direction.
The location estimate obtained in one of the previously described methods can be viewed as a noisy observation of the true location, i.e.,
{circumflex over (x)}(n)=x(n)+e(n), (14)
where e(n) is the estimation error. We approximate the estimation error with zero-mean multivariate Gaussian distribution and evaluate its covariance matrix K(n).
Hence, using the linear model for the dynamics of the location coordinates in (13) and (approximated) Gaussian observation model in eq. (14), the location estimates are further processed by applying a linear Kalman filter. Suppose that the final location estimate and the covariance matrix at time n−1, obtained from Kalman filter, are respectively xf(n−1) and Σ(n−1). Our goal is to refine the estimate {circumflex over (x)}(n) obtained from the EM procedure 320, and produce the final location estimate xf(n) and covariance matrix Σ(n). Note that xf(n) and Σ(n) are, respectively, the mean and covariance matrix of the Gaussian posterior distribution of the location x(n), conditioned on x(1), . . . , x(n−1).
The joint EM-Kalman filtering method 500, whose block diagram is shown in
{tilde over (x)}(n)=xf(n−1)+Δx(n) (15)
{tilde over (Σ)}(n)=Σ(n−1)+σo2I, (16)
Then, using the RSS level zj(n), j=1, . . . , N, location estimate and hard estimates of path loss coefficients Note that the probability distributions are initialized using predicted location (n), evaluated in eq. (1). The provisional location estimate and hard estimates of path loss coefficients are used to evaluate
The updated location estimate, i.e., the final location estimate, and covariance matrix are finally obtained as
xf(n)={tilde over (x)}(n)+({circumflex over (x)}(n)−{circumflex over (x)}(n))({tilde over (Σ)}(n)+K(n))−1{tilde over (Σ)}(n), and (17)
Σ(n)={tilde over (Σ)}(n)−{tilde over (Σ)}(n)({tilde over (Σ)}(n)+K(n))−1{tilde over (Σ)}(n). (18)
The statistics of the estimation error e(n) and final location estimate and its covariance matrix are computed in 520.
The method outputs the final location estimate in 202.
Note that we have implicitly assumed n>1 in the description of method 500. However, for the first localization request when n=1, the EM procedure can be initialized with uniform distributions on path loss coefficients, just as in method 200 of
Method for Computing the Statistics of the Estimation Error
We first recall that {circumflex over (x)}(n) is the ML estimate of the unknown location x(n). The statistics of noise process e(n) can be approximated using an asymptotic characterization of the ML estimation error. Assume an observation model py(y; x), where x is an unknown parameter that we infer from M i.i.d. measurements y1, . . . , ym using the ML approach. Under some conditions, usually satisfied in practice, as M→∞, √{square root over (M)}(x−{circumflex over (x)}ML)→(0,σ2) in distribution, where
Using this result, the estimation error e(n) is approximated using an observation matrix or Laplace approximation as a zero mean Gaussian random vector whose covariance matrix K(n) is given by the inverse of the observed information matrix
where l(z1(n), . . . , zN(n)|h1(n), . . . , hN(n)) is the joint log-likelihood, defined in eq. (3). The joint log-likelihood is evaluated at {circumflex over (x)}(n) and for hard estimates of the path loss coefficients ĥ1(n), ĥN(n), obtained from the EM procedure 320. These path loss coefficients are hard estimates obtained from the corresponding probability distributions. Note that the information matrix eq. (19) is essentially the Hessian matrix of the negative joint log-likelihood.
Alternative Method for Computing Estimation Error Statistics
Alternatively, the statistics of the estimation error e(n) can be approximated by treating unknown location x(n) as a random vector, whose posterior distribution given the measured RSS level zj of the reference signal transmitted from the AP j and assuming that path loss coefficient hj is known (or estimated accurately), is up to the normalization constant given by
P(x|zj)∝p(zj|x)p(x), (20)
where p(x) is the prior distribution of the unknown location. We assume that p(x) has uniform distribution over the enclosed environment because either (i) we do not have any prior information of the position of the device or (ii) information about previous location is already included in the prediction step in eq. (15) and (16). On the other hand, likelihood p(zj|x) is Gaussian distributed with mean x and variance σv2, as specified in eq. (2). Therefore, the posterior in eq. (20) is a multivariate Gaussian distribution with mean x and variance σv2 in each coordinate direction, and truncated within the boundaries of the enclosed environment. This distribution is known in art as a truncated Gaussian distribution. This conclusion is easily generalized to the case when the device receives reference signals from N APs.
Overall, the estimation error e(n) made by estimating unknown location x(n) with {circumflex over (x)}(n) is distributed according to a multivariate Gaussian distribution with zero mean, covariance matrix σv2I, and truncated within the enclosed environment. In principle, the covariance matrix of the truncated Gaussian distribution can be evaluated. However, for simplicity, we approximate the covariance matrix with the covariance matrix of the untruncated Gaussian distribution. To conclude, the estimation error e(n) is therefore approximated with a multivariate Gaussian distribution of zero mean and covariance matrix σv2I.
Although the invention has been described by way of examples of preferred embodiments, it is to be understood that various other adaptations and modifications may be made within the spirit and scope of the invention. Therefore, it is the object of the appended claims to cover all such variations and modifications as come within the true spirit and scope of the invention.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
7035632 | Gutowski | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7317419 | Sugar et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7941163 | Margrave | May 2011 | B2 |
8077090 | Chintalapudi et al. | Dec 2011 | B1 |
8264402 | Kaiser et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
8620301 | Hessel | Dec 2013 | B1 |
8879607 | Skarp | Nov 2014 | B2 |
20100208603 | Ishii | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20110092210 | Kumar | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110250891 | Zou | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20120100870 | Prost | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120129546 | Yang | May 2012 | A1 |
20130273937 | Nakahara | Oct 2013 | A1 |