A Survey on Detection, Tracking and Identification in Radio Frequency-Based Device-Free Localization
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Detection
2.1. Motion Detection
2.1.1. Early Systems
2.1.2. RASID
2.1.3. FIMD
2.2. Crowd Estimation
3. Tracking
3.1. Radio Tomographic Imaging
3.1.1. Shadowing-Based RTI, Variance-Based RTI and Subspace Variance-Based RTI
3.1.2. Histogram- and Kernel-Based RTI
3.1.3. Multichannel and Fade Level Based RTI
3.1.4. Multitracking
3.1.5. Sub-GHz RTI
3.1.6. Adaptive RTI
3.1.7. Energy Efficient RTI
3.2. Non-RTI Model-Based Methods
3.3. Passive Radio Mapping
3.3.1. Early Fingerprinting System
3.3.2. Nuzzer
3.3.3. Probabilistic Passive Fingerprinting Using Discriminant Analysis
3.3.4. SCPL
3.3.5. ACE
3.3.6. Fingerprint Database Longevity
3.3.7. Pilot
4. Identification
4.1. RSS-Based Fingerprinting
4.2. CSI-Based Gait Analysis
5. Future Research Directions
5.1. Publicly Available Datasets
5.2. Deployment in Complex Environments and Associated Constraints
5.3. Fingerprint Database Longevity
5.4. Solving the Identification Problem
5.5. DFL in next Generation Networks and IoT
5.6. RSS to CSI
5.7. Combining Detection, Tracking and Identification in a Single System
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Drawil, N.M.; Amar, H.M.; Basir, O.A. GPS localization accuracy classification: A context-based approach. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transport. Syst. 2013, 14, 262–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, D.; Xia, F.; Yang, Z.; Yao, L.; Zhao, W. Localization technologies for indoor human tracking. In Proceedings of the 2010 5th International Conference on Future Information Technology (FutureTech), Busan, Korea, 21–23 May 2010; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Shao, S.; Khreishah, A.; Khalil, I. RETRO: Retroreflector based visible light indoor localization for real-time tracking of IoT devices. In Proceedings of the IEEE INFOCOM 2018—IEEE Conference on Computer Communications, Honolulu, HI, USA, 16–19 April 2018; pp. 1025–1033. [Google Scholar]
- Weyn, M. Opportunistic Seamless Localization. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, Z.; Xia, F.; Huang, T.; Bu, F.; Wang, H. A localization method for the Internet of Things. J. Supercomput. 2013, 63, 657–674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Youssef, M.; Mah, M.; Agrawala, A. Challenges: Device-free passive localization for wireless environments. In Proceedings of the 13th Annual ACM International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, Montreal, QC, Canada, 14–19 March 2007; pp. 222–229. [Google Scholar]
- Scholz, M.; Kohout, L.; Horne, M.; Budde, M.; Beigl, M.; Youssef, M.A. Device-free radio-based low overhead identification of subject classes. In Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Workshop on Physical Analytics, Florence, Italy, 22 May 2015; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Lv, J.; Yang, W.; Man, D.; Du, X.; Yu, M.; Guizani, M. Wii: Device-Free Passive Identity Identification via WiFi Signals. In Proceedings of the GLOBECOM 2017—2017 IEEE Global Communications Conference, Singapore, 4–8 December 2017; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, Y.; Dong, W.; Gao, Y.; Liu, X.; Gu, T. Rapid: A multimodal and device-free approach using noise estimation for robust person identification. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 2017, 1, 41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fleuret, F.; Berclaz, J.; Lengagne, R.; Fua, P. Multicamera people tracking with a probabilistic occupancy map. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 2008, 30, 267–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Zou, W.W.; Yuen, P.C. Very low resolution face recognition problem. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 2012, 21, 327–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Aziz, M.W.; Naeem, F.; Alizai, M.H.; Khan, K.B. Automated solutions for crowd size estimation. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 2018, 36, 610–631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kemper, J.; Hauschildt, D. Passive infrared localization with a probability hypothesis density filter. In Proceedings of the 2010 7th Workshop on Positioning Navigation and Communication (WPNC), Dresden, Germany, 11–12 March 2010; pp. 68–76. [Google Scholar]
- Kashimoto, Y.; Fujimoto, M.; Suwa, H.; Arakawa, Y.; Yasumoto, K. Floor vibration type estimation with piezo sensor toward indoor positioning system. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), Alcala de Henares, Spain, 4–7 October 2016; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Patel, S.N.; Reynolds, M.S.; Abowd, G.D. Detecting human movement by differential air pressure sensing in HVAC system ductwork: An exploration in infrastructure mediated sensing. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Pervasive Computing, Nara, Japan, 11–14 May 2008; pp. 1–18. [Google Scholar]
- Valtonen, M.; Maentausta, J.; Vanhala, J. Tiletrack: Capacitive human tracking using floor tiles. In Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications, Galveston, TX, USA, 9–13 March 2009; pp. 1–10. [Google Scholar]
- Camero Tech. Available online: http://www.camero-tech.com/ (accessed on 27 April 2019).
- Wilson, A.J. Device-Free Localization with Received Signal Strength Measurements in Wireless Networks. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Sasakawa, D.; Honma, N.; Nishimori, K.; Nakayama, T.; Shoichi, I. Evaluation of fast human localization and tracking using MIMO radar in multi-path environment. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE 27th Annual International Symposium on Personal, Indoor, and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC), Valencia, Spain, 4–8 September 2016; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Sasakawa, D.; Honma, N.; Nakayama, T.; Iizuka, S. Evaluation of filtering technique for human activity identification using MIMO radar. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Symposium on Antennas and Propagation (ISAP), Phuket, Thailand, 30 October–2 November 2017; pp. 1–2. [Google Scholar]
- Konno, K.; Honma, N.; Sasakawa, D.; Nishimori, K.; Takemura, N.; Mitsui, T.; Tsunekawa, Y. Estimating living-body location using bistatic MIMO radar in multi-path environment. IEICE Trans. Commun. 2015, 98, 2314–2321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cianca, E.; De Sanctis, M.; Di Domenico, S. Radios as Sensors. IEEE Internet Things J. 2017, 4, 363–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sigg, S.; Scholz, M.; Shi, S.; Ji, Y.; Beigl, M. RF-sensing of activities from non-cooperative subjects in device-free recognition systems using ambient and local signals. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2014, 13, 907–920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Liu, J.; Chen, Y.; Gruteser, M.; Yang, J.; Liu, H. E-eyes: Device-free location-oriented activity identification using fine-grained wifi signatures. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, Maui, HI, USA, 7–11 September 2014; pp. 617–628. [Google Scholar]
- Wei, B.; Hu, W.; Yang, M.; Chou, C.T. Radio-based device-free activity recognition with radio frequency interference. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks, Seattle, WA, USA, 14–16 April 2015; pp. 154–165. [Google Scholar]
- Guo, B.; Chen, Y.J.; Lane, N.; Liu, Y.; Yu, Z. Behavior Recognition Based on Wi-Fi CSI: Part 1. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2017, 55, 90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Guo, B.; Chen, Y.J.; Lane, N.; Liu, Y.; Yu, Z. Behavior Recognition Based on Wi-Fi CSI: Part 2. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2018, 56, 108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patwari, N.; Brewer, L.; Tate, Q.; Kaltiokallio, O.; Bocca, M. Breathfinding: A Wireless Network That Monitors and Locates Breathing in a Home. J. Sel. Top. Signal Process. 2014, 8, 30–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Abdelnasser, H.; Harras, K.A.; Youssef, M. UbiBreathe: A ubiquitous non-invasive WiFi-based breathing estimator. In Proceedings of the 16th ACM International Symposium on Mobile Ad Hoc Networking and Computing, Hangzhou, China, 22–25 June 2015; pp. 277–286. [Google Scholar]
- Pu, Q.; Gupta, S.; Gollakota, S.; Patel, S. Whole-home gesture recognition using wireless signals. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing & Networking, Miami, FL, USA, 30 September–4 October 2013; pp. 27–38. [Google Scholar]
- Abdelnasser, H.; Harras, K.A.; Youssef, M. WiGest demo: A ubiquitous WiFi-based gesture recognition system. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Communications Workshops (INFOCOM WKSHPS), Hong Kong, China, 26 April–1 May 2015; pp. 17–18. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, T.; Wei, X.H.; Chen, Z.M.; Luo, X.M.; Liu, J. Abnormal activity detection based on received signal strengths of radio tomographic networks. In Proceedings of the 2017 29th Chinese Control And Decision Conference (CCDC), Chongqing, China, 28–30 May 2017; pp. 7310–7314. [Google Scholar]
- Jiang, H.; Cai, C.; Ma, X.; Yang, Y.; Liu, J. Smart home based on WiFi sensing: A survey. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 13317–13325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patwari, N.; Wilson, J. RF sensor networks for device-free localization: Measurements, models, and algorithms. Proc. IEEE 2010, 98, 1961–1973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Deak, G.; Curran, K.; Condell, J.; Asimakopoulou, E.; Bessis, N. IoTs (Internet of Things) and DfPL (Device-free Passive Localisation) in a disaster management scenario. Simul. Model. Pract. Theory 2013, 35, 86–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pirzada, N.; Nayan, M.Y.; Hassan, F.S.M.F.; Khan, M.A. Device-free localization technique for indoor detection and tracking of human body: A survey. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2014, 129, 422–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhou, Z.; Wu, C.; Yang, Z.; Liu, Y. Sensorless sensing with WiFi. Tsinghua Sci. Technol. 2015, 20, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shukri, S.; Kamarudin, L.M. Device free localization technology for human detection and counting with RF sensor networks: A review. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2017, 97, 157–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Palipana, S.; Pietropaoli, B.; Pesch, D. Recent advances in RF-based passive device-free localisation for indoor applications. Ad Hoc Netw. 2017, 64, 80–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wilson, J.; Patwari, N. Radio Tomographic Imaging with Wireless Networks; Technical Report; University of Utah: Salt Lake City, UT, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Wilson, J.; Patwari, N. Radio tomographic imaging with wireless networks. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2010, 9, 621–632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Moussa, M.; Youssef, M. Smart services for smart environments: Device-free passive detection in real environments. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications (PerCom 2009), Galveston, TX, USA, 9–13 March 2009; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Lee, P.W.; Seah, W.K.; Tan, H.P.; Yao, Z. Wireless sensing without sensors—An experimental approach. In Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE 20th International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications, Tokyo, Japan, 13–16 September 2009; pp. 62–66. [Google Scholar]
- Kosba, A.E.; Saeed, A.; Youssef, M. Rasid: A robust wlan device-free passive motion detection system. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications (PerCom), Lugano, Switzerland, 19–23 March 2012; pp. 180–189. [Google Scholar]
- Xiao, J.; Wu, K.; Yi, Y.; Wang, L.; Ni, L.M. Fimd: Fine-grained device-free motion detection. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE 18th International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Systems (ICPADS), Singapore, 17–19 December 2012; pp. 229–235. [Google Scholar]
- Yuan, Y.; Zhao, J.; Qiu, C.; Xi, W. Estimating crowd density in an RF-based dynamic environment. IEEE Sens. J. 2013, 13, 3837–3845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xi, W.; Zhao, J.; Li, X.Y.; Zhao, K.; Tang, S.; Liu, X.; Jiang, Z. Electronic frog eye: Counting crowd using wifi. In Proceedings of the IEEE INFOCOM 2014—IEEE Conference on Computer Communications, Toronto, ON, Canada, 27 April–2 May 2014; pp. 361–369. [Google Scholar]
- Depatla, S.; Muralidharan, A.; Mostofi, Y. Occupancy estimation using only WiFi power measurements. IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 2015, 33, 1381–1393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fadhlullah, S.Y.; Ismail, W. A statistical approach in designing an rf-based human crowd density estimation system. Int. J. Distrib. Sens. Netw. 2016, 12, 8351017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Di Domenico, S.; De Sanctis, M.; Cianca, E.; Colucci, P.; Bianchi, G. LTE-based passive device-free crowd density estimation. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC), Paris, France, 21–25 May 2017; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Di Domenico, S.; De Sanctis, M.; Cianca, E.; Bianchi, G. A trained-once crowd counting method using differential wifi channel state information. In Proceedings of the 3rd International on Workshop on Physical Analytics, Singapore, 26 June 2016; pp. 37–42. [Google Scholar]
- Di Domenico, S.; Pecoraro, G.; Cianca, E.; De Sanctis, M. Trained-once device-free crowd counting and occupancy estimation using WiFi: A Doppler spectrum based approach. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE 12th International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Computing, Networking and Communications (WiMob), New York, NY, USA, 17–19 October 2016; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- Zou, H.; Zhou, Y.; Yang, J.; Spanos, C.J. Device-free occupancy detection and crowd counting in smart buildings with WiFi-enabled IoT. Energy Build. 2018, 174, 309–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- OpenWrt. Available online: https://openwrt.org/ (accessed on 30 October 2019).
- Denis, S.; Berkvens, R.; Bellekens, B.; Weyn, M. Large Scale Crowd Density Estimation Using a sub-GHz Wireless Sensor Network. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 29th Annual International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC), Bologna, Italy, 9–12 September 2018; pp. 849–855. [Google Scholar]
- Weyn, M.; Ergeerts, G.; Berkvens, R.; Wojciechowski, B.; Tabakov, Y. DASH7 alliance protocol 1.0: Low-power, mid-range sensor and actuator communication. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE Conference on Standards for Communications and Networking (CSCN), Tokyo, Japan, 28–30 October 2015; pp. 54–59. [Google Scholar]
- Wilson, J.; Patwari, N. See-through walls: Motion tracking using variance-based radio tomography networks. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2011, 10, 612–621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bocca, M.; Kaltiokallio, O.; Patwari, N.; Venkatasubramanian, S. Multiple target tracking with RF sensor networks. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2014, 13, 1787–1800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wilson, J.; Patwari, N.; Vasquez, F.G. Regularization methods for radio tomographic imaging. In Proceedings of the 2009 Virginia Tech Symposium on Wireless Personal Communications, Blacksburg, VA, USA, 3–5 June 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Zhao, Y.; Patwari, N. Noise reduction for variance-based device-free localization and tracking. In Proceedings of the 2011 8th Annual IEEE Communications Society Conference on Sensor, Mesh and Ad Hoc Communications and Networks (SECON), Salt Lake City, UT, USA, 27–30 June 2011; pp. 179–187. [Google Scholar]
- Patra, A.; Simic, L.; Petrova, M. mmRTI: Radio tomographic imaging using highly-directional millimeter-wave devices for accurate and robust indoor localization. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE 28th Annual International Symposium on Personal, Indoor, and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC), Montreal, QC, Canada, 8–13 October 2017; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Kaltiokallio, O.; Bocca, M.; Patwari, N. A fade level-based spatial model for radio tomographic imaging. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2014, 13, 1159–1172. [Google Scholar]
- Bocca, M.; Luong, A.; Patwari, N.; Schmid, T. Dial it in: Rotating RF sensors to enhance radio tomography. In Proceedings of the 2014 Eleventh Annual IEEE International Conference on Sensing, Communication, and Networking (SECON), Singapore, 30 June–3 July 2014; pp. 600–608. [Google Scholar]
- Jiménez, A.; Seco, F. Combining RSS-based trilateration methods with radio-tomographic imaging: Exploring the capabilities of long-range RFID systems. In Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), Banff, AB, Canada, 13–16 October 2015; pp. 1–10. [Google Scholar]
- Alippi, C.; Bocca, M.; Boracchi, G.; Patwari, N.; Roveri, M. RTI goes wild: Radio tomographic imaging for outdoor people detection and localization. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2016, 15, 2585–2598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhao, Y.; Patwari, N. Histogram distance-based radio tomographic localization. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks, Beijing, China, 16–20 April 2012; pp. 129–130. [Google Scholar]
- Zhao, Y.; Patwari, N.; Phillips, J.M.; Venkatasubramanian, S. Radio tomographic imaging and tracking of stationary and moving people via kernel distance. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks (IPSN), Berlin, Germany, 15–17 April 2013; pp. 229–240. [Google Scholar]
- Kaltiokallio, O.; Bocca, M.; Patwari, N. Enhancing the accuracy of radio tomographic imaging using channel diversity. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE 9th International Conference on Mobile Adhoc and Sensor Systems (MASS), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 8–11 October 2012; pp. 254–262. [Google Scholar]
- Kaemarungsi, K.; Krishnamurthy, P. Properties of indoor received signal strength for WLAN location fingerprinting. In Proceedings of the First Annual International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Systems: Networking and Services (MOBIQUITOUS 2004), Boston, MA, USA, 26 August 2004; pp. 14–23. [Google Scholar]
- Adler, S.; Schmitt, S.; Kyas, M. Device-free indoor localisation using radio tomography imaging in 800/900 MHz band. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), Busan, Korea, 27–30 October 2014; pp. 544–553. [Google Scholar]
- Denis, S.; Berkvens, R.; Ergeerts, G.; Bellekens, B.; Weyn, M. Combining multiple sub-1 ghz frequencies in radio tomographic imaging. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), Alcala de Henares, Spain, 4–7 October 2016; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- Sensing and Processing Across Networks Lab. Available online: https://span.ece.utah.edu/ (accessed on 18 March 2019).
- Fink, A.; Ritt, T.; Beikirch, H. Redundant radio tomographic imaging for privacy-aware indoor user localization. In Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), Banff, AB, Canada, 13–16 October 2015; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Denis, S.; Berkvens, R.; Ergeerts, G.; Weyn, M. Multi-frequency sub-1 GHz radio tomographic imaging in a complex indoor environment. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), Sapporo, Japan, 18–21 September 2017; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- Wagner, B.; Patwari, N.; Timmermann, D. Passive RFID Tomographic Imaging for Device-Free User Localization. In Proceedings of the 9th Workshop on Positioning, Navigation and Communication (WPNC), Dresden, Germany, 15–16 March 2012; pp. 120–125. [Google Scholar]
- Wagner, B.; Striebing, B.; Timmermann, D. A system for live localization in smart environments. In Proceedings of the 2013 10th IEEE International Conference on Networking, Sensing and Control (ICNSC), Evry, France, 10–12 April 2013; pp. 684–689. [Google Scholar]
- Kaltiokallio, O.; Jäntti, R.; Patwari, N. ARTI: An adaptive radio tomographic imaging system. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2017, 66, 7302–7316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kanso, M.A.; Rabbat, M.G. Compressed RF tomography for wireless sensor networks: Centralized and decentralized approaches. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems, Marina del Rey, CA, USA, 8–10 June 2009; pp. 173–186. [Google Scholar]
- Romero, D.; Lee, D.; Giannakis, G.B. Blind radio tomography. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 2018, 66, 2055–2069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beck, B.; Ma, X.; Baxley, R. Ultrawideband tomographic imaging in uncalibrated networks. IEEE Trans. Wirel. Commun. 2016, 15, 6474–6486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beck, B.M. Localization and Tomographic Imaging for Spatially Aware Mobile Radio Networks. Ph.D. Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, J.; Gao, Q.; Zhang, X.; Wang, H. Device-free localisation with wireless networks based on compressive sensing. IET Commun. 2012, 6, 2395–2403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, K.; Guo, Y.; Yang, L.; Guo, X.; Wang, G. Optimal information based adaptive compressed radio tomographic imaging. In Proceedings of the 32nd Chinese Control Conference, Xi’an, China, 26–28 July 2013; pp. 7438–7444. [Google Scholar]
- Huang, K.; Luo, Y.; Guo, X.; Wang, G. Data-efficient radio tomographic imaging with adaptive Bayesian compressive sensing. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE International Conference on Information and Automation, Lijiang, China, 8–10 August 2015; pp. 1859–1864. [Google Scholar]
- Huang, K.; Tan, S.; Luo, Y.; Guo, X.; Wang, G. Enhanced radio tomographic imaging with heterogeneous Bayesian compressive sensing. Pervasive Mob. Comput. 2017, 40, 450–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, S.; Liu, H.; Gao, F.; Wang, Z. Compressive Sensing Based Radio Tomographic Imaging with Spatial Diversity. Sensors 2019, 19, 439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Khaledi, M.; Kasera, S.K.; Patwari, N.; Bocca, M. Energy efficient radio tomographic imaging. In Proceedings of the 2014 Eleventh Annual IEEE International Conference on Sensing, Communication, and Networking (SECON), Singapore, 30 June–3 July 2014; pp. 609–617. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, Z.; Liu, H.; Xu, S.; Bu, X.; An, J. Bayesian device-free localization and tracking in a binary RF sensor network. Sensors 2017, 17, 969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Li, Y.; Chen, X.; Coates, M.; Yang, B. Sequential Monte Carlo radio-frequency tomographic tracking. In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), Prague, Czech Republic, 22–27 May 2011; pp. 3976–3979. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, X.; Edelstein, A.; Li, Y.; Coates, M.; Rabbat, M.; Men, A. Sequential Monte Carlo for simultaneous passive device-free tracking and sensor localization using received signal strength measurements. In Proceedings of the 2011 10th International Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks (IPSN), Chicago, IL, USA, 12–14 April 2011; pp. 342–353. [Google Scholar]
- Wilson, J.; Patwari, N. A fade-level skew-laplace signal strength model for device-free localization with wireless networks. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2012, 11, 947–958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zheng, Y.; Men, A. Through-wall tracking with radio tomography networks using foreground detection. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC), Shanghai, China, 1–4 April 2012; pp. 3278–3283. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, D.; Liu, Y.; Guo, X.; Ni, L.M. Rass: A real-time, accurate, and scalable system for tracking transceiver-free objects. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 2013, 24, 996–1008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saeed, A.; Kosba, A.E.; Youssef, M. Ichnaea: A low-overhead robust WLAN device-free passive localization system. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Signal Process. 2014, 8, 5–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Savazzi, S.; Nicoli, M.; Carminati, F.; Riva, M. A Bayesian approach to device-free localization: Modeling and experimental assessment. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Signal Process. 2013, 8, 16–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Z.; Liu, H.; Xu, S.; Bu, X.; An, J. A diffraction measurement model and particle filter tracking method for RSS-based DFL. IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 2015, 33, 2391–2403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.; Gao, Q.; Yu, Y.; Cheng, P.; Wu, L.; Wang, H. Robust device-free wireless localization based on differential RSS measurements. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2012, 60, 5943–5952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, Y.; Huang, K.; Jiang, N.; Guo, X.; Wang, G. An Exponential-Rayleigh signal strength model for device-free localization and tracking with wireless networks. In Proceedings of the 2013 Fourth International Conference on Intelligent Control and Information Processing (ICICIP), Beijing, China, 9–11 June 2013; pp. 108–113. [Google Scholar]
- Luo, Y.; Huang, K.; Guo, X.; Wang, G. A hierarchical RSS model for RF-based device-free localization. Pervasive Mob. Comput. 2016, 31, 124–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoffman, J.R.; Mahler, R.P. Multitarget miss distance via optimal assignment. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A Syst. Hum. 2004, 34, 327–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaltiokallio, O.; Yiğitler, H.; Jäntti, R. A three-state received signal strength model for device-free localization. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2017, 66, 9226–9240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Guo, Y.; Huang, K.; Jiang, N.; Guo, X.; Li, Y.; Wang, G. An exponential-Rayleigh model for RSS-based device-free localization and tracking. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2015, 14, 484–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hillyard, P.; Patwari, N. Never Use Labels: Signal Strength-Based Bayesian Device-Free Localization in Changing Environments. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wang, J.; Gao, Q.; Wang, H.; Cheng, P.; Xin, K. Device-free localization with multidimensional wireless link information. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2015, 64, 356–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.; Fang, D.; Yang, Z.; Jiang, H.; Chen, X.; Xing, T.; Cai, L. E-HIPA: An energy-efficient framework for high-precision multi-target-adaptive device-free localization. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2017, 16, 716–729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.; Gao, Q.; Cheng, P.; Yu, Y.; Xin, K.; Wang, H. Lightweight robust device-free localization in wireless networks. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2014, 61, 5681–5689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Z.; Huang, K.; Guo, X.; Wang, G. A real-time device-free localization system using correlated RSS measurements. EURASIP J. Wirel. Commun. Netw. 2013, 2013, 186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wang, J.; Jiang, H.; Xiong, J.; Jamieson, K.; Chen, X.; Fang, D.; Xie, B. LiFS: Low human-effort, device-free localization with fine-grained subcarrier information. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, New York, NY, USA, 3–7 October 2016; pp. 243–256. [Google Scholar]
- Xiao, J.; Wu, K.; Yi, Y.; Wang, L.; Ni, L.M. Pilot: Passive device-free indoor localization using channel state information. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE 33rd international conference on Distributed computing systems (ICDCS), Philadelphia, PA, USA, 8–11 July 2013; pp. 236–245. [Google Scholar]
- Torres-Sospedra, J.; Moreira, A.; Knauth, S.; Berkvens, R.; Montoliu, R.; Belmonte, O.; Trilles, S.; João Nicolau, M.; Meneses, F.; Costa, A.; et al. A realistic evaluation of indoor positioning systems based on Wi-Fi fingerprinting: The 2015 EvAAL–ETRI competition. J. Ambient Intell. Smart Environ. 2017, 9, 263–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Torres-Sospedra, J.; Jiménez, A.; Knauth, S.; Moreira, A.; Beer, Y.; Fetzer, T.; Ta, V.C.; Montoliu, R.; Seco, F.; Mendoza-Silva, G.; et al. The smartphone-based offline indoor location competition at IPIN 2016: Analysis and future work. Sensors 2017, 17, 557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Aly, H.; Youssef, M. New insights into wifi-based device-free localization. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing Adjunct Publication, Zurich, Switzerland, 8–12 September 2013; pp. 541–548. [Google Scholar]
- Seifeldin, M.; Saeed, A.; Kosba, A.E.; El-Keyi, A.; Youssef, M. Nuzzer: A large-scale device-free passive localization system for wireless environments. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2013, 12, 1321–1334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, C.; Firner, B.; Zhang, Y.; Howard, R.; Li, J.; Lin, X. Improving RF-based device-free passive localization in cluttered indoor environments through probabilistic classification methods. In Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks, Beijing, China, 16–19 April 2012; pp. 209–220. [Google Scholar]
- Friedman, J.; Hastie, T.; Tibshirani, R. The Elements of Statistical Learning; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2001; Volume 1. [Google Scholar]
- Xu, C.; Firner, B.; Zhang, Y.; Howard, R.E. The case for efficient and robust RF-based device-free localization. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2015, 15, 2362–2375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, C.; Firner, B.; Moore, R.S.; Zhang, Y.; Trappe, W.; Howard, R.; Zhang, F.; An, N. SCPL: Indoor device-free multi-subject counting and localization using radio signal strength. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 8–11 April 2013; pp. 79–90. [Google Scholar]
- Lafferty, J.; McCallum, A.; Pereira, F.C. Williamstown, MA, USA, 28 June–1 July 2001; Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2001; pp. 282–289.
- Forney, G.D. The viterbi algorithm. Proc. IEEE 1973, 61, 268–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sabek, I.; Youssef, M.; Vasilakos, A.V. ACE: An accurate and efficient multi-entity device-free WLAN localization system. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2015, 14, 261–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sabek, I.; Youssef, M. Multi-entity device-free WLAN localization. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM), Anaheim, CA, USA, 3–7 December 2012; pp. 2018–2023. [Google Scholar]
- Mager, B.; Lundrigan, P.; Patwari, N. Fingerprint-based device-free localization performance in changing environments. IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 2015, 33, 2429–2438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lei, Q.; Zhang, H.; Sun, H.; Tang, L. Fingerprint-Based Device-Free Localization in Changing Environments Using Enhanced Channel Selection and Logistic Regression. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 2569–2577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Husseiny, A.; Youssef, M. RF-based traffic detection and identification. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Fall), Quebec, QC, Canada, 3–6 September 2012; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
- Anderson, C.R.; Martin, R.K.; Walker, T.O.; Thomas, R.W. Radio tomography for roadside surveillance. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Signal Process. 2014, 8, 66–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kale, A.; Sundaresan, A.; Rajagopalan, A.; Cuntoor, N.P.; Roy-Chowdhury, A.K.; Kruger, V.; Chellappa, R. Identification of humans using gait. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 2004, 13, 1163–1173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boulgouris, N.V.; Hatzinakos, D.; Plataniotis, K.N. Gait recognition: A challenging signal processing technology for biometric identification. IEEE Signal Process. Mag. 2005, 22, 78–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, J.; Wei, B.; Hu, W.; Kanhere, S.S. Wifi-id: Human identification using wifi signal. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems (DCOSS), Washington, DC, USA, 26–28 May 2016; pp. 75–82. [Google Scholar]
- Zeng, Y.; Pathak, P.H.; Mohapatra, P. WiWho: wifi-based person identification in smart spaces. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks, Vienna, Austria, 11–14 April 2016; IEEE Press: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2016; p. 4. [Google Scholar]
- Xin, T.; Guo, B.; Wang, Z.; Li, M.; Yu, Z.; Zhou, X. Freesense: Indoor human identification with Wi-Fi signals. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM), Washington, DC, USA, 4–8 December 2016; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Lv, J.; Yang, W.; Man, D. Device-free passive identity identification via wifi signals. Sensors 2017, 17, 2520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Span Lab Datasets. Available online: https://span.ece.utah.edu/products.html (accessed on 26 April 2019).
- Call for Contesters CPS-IoT Week DFL Competition. Available online: http://dflcompetition.org/call.html (accessed on 26 April 2019).
- UCI Machine Learning Repository. Available online: https://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets.php (accessed on 26 April 2019).
- Montoliu, R.; Sansano, E.; Torres-Sospedra, J.; Belmonte, O. IndoorLoc platform: A public repository for comparing and evaluating indoor positioning systems. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), Sapporo, Japan, 18–21 September 2017; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- Aernouts, M.; Berkvens, R.; Van Vlaenderen, K.; Weyn, M. Sigfox and LoRaWAN datasets for fingerprint localization in large urban and rural areas. Data 2018, 3, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mendoza-Silva, G.; Richter, P.; Torres-Sospedra, J.; Lohan, E.; Huerta, J. Long-term WiFi fingerprinting dataset for research on robust indoor positioning. Data 2018, 3, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Maas, D.; Wilson, J.; Patwari, N. Toward a rapidly deployable radio tomographic imaging system for tactical operations. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE 38th Conference on Local Computer Networks Workshops (LCN Workshops), Sydney, Australia, 21–24 October 2013; pp. 203–210. [Google Scholar]
- Wei, B.; Varshney, A.; Patwari, N.; Hu, W.; Voigt, T.; Chou, C.T. drti: Directional radio tomographic imaging. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks, Seattle, WA, USA, 14–16 April 2015; pp. 166–177. [Google Scholar]
- Qi, C.; Hillyard, P.; Al-Husseiny, A.; Patwari, N.; Durgin, G.D. On-Wall, Wide Bandwidth E-Shaped Patch Antenna for Improved Whole-Home Radio Tomography. IEEE J. Radio Freq. Identif. 2017, 1, 22–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaltiokallio, O.; Bocca, M.; Patwari, N. Follow@ grandma: Long-term device-free localization for residential monitoring. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE 37th Conference on Local Computer Networks Workshops (LCN Workshops), Clearwater Beach, FL, USA, 22–25 October 2012; pp. 991–998. [Google Scholar]
- Ruan, W.; Sheng, Q.Z.; Yao, L.; Gu, T.; Ruta, M.; Shangguan, L. Device-free indoor localization and tracking through human-object interactions. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE 17th International Symposium on a World of Wireless, Mobile and Multimedia Networks (WoWMoM), Coimbra, Portugal, 21–24 June 2016; pp. 1–9. [Google Scholar]
- Patra, A.; Wittig, S.; Voicu, A.; Simic, L.; Petrova, M. Experimental evaluation of radio tomographic imaging algorithms for indoor localization with Wi-Fi. In Proceedings of the GLOBECOM 2017-2017 IEEE Global Communications Conference, Singapore, 4–8 December 2017; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Konings, D.; Alam, F.; Noble, F.; Lai, E.M. Device-free Localization Systems Utilizing Wireless RSSI: A Comparative Practical Investigation. IEEE Sens. J. 2018, 19, 2747–2757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wilson, A.J.; Patwari, N.K. Systems and Methods of Device-Free Motion Detection and Presence Detection. US Patent 8,710,984, 29 April 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Xandem. Available online: https://www.xandem.com/ (accessed on 18 March 2019).
- Kianoush, S.; Savazzi, S.; Vicentini, F.; Rampa, V.; Giussani, M. Device-free RF human body fall detection and localization in industrial workplaces. IEEE Internet Things J. 2016, 4, 351–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kianoush, S.; Raja, M.; Savazzi, S.; Sigg, S. A cloud-IoT platform for passive radio sensing: Challenges and application case studies. IEEE Internet Things J. 2018, 5, 3624–3636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Savazzi, S.; Kianoush, S.; Rampa, V.; Spagnolini, U. Cellular data analytics for detection and discrimination of body movements. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 51484–51499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Viani, F.; Robol, F.; Giarola, E.; Rocca, P.; Oliveri, G.; Massa, A. Passive imaging strategies for real-time wireless localization of non-cooperative targets in security applications. In Proceedings of the 2015 9th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EuCAP), Lisbon, Portugal, 13–17 April 2015; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar]
- Savazzi, S.; Sigg, S.; Vicentini, F.; Kianoush, S.; Findling, R. On the Use of Stray Wireless Signals for Sensing: A Look Beyond 5G for the Next Generation of Industry. Computer 2019, 52, 25–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Studer, C.; Medjkouh, S.; Gönültaş, E.; Goldstein, T.; Tirkkonen, O. Channel charting: Locating users within the radio environment using channel state information. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 47682–47698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, Y.; Patwari, N. An experimental comparison of radio transceiver and transceiver-free localization methods. J. Sens. Actuator Netw. 2016, 5, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yang, Z.; Zhou, Z.; Liu, Y. From RSSI to CSI: Indoor localization via channel response. ACM Comput. Surv. CSUR 2013, 46, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Reference | Technique(s) | Standard(s) | # of Nodes | Detection/Counting/Classification | Environment | RSS/CSI | Reported Accuracy |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Youssef et al. [6] | Moving Average-based Moving Variance-based Detection | IEEE 802.11b (2.4 GHz) | 2 TX 2 RX | Detection only | Lab (idealized) | RSS | 100% (0 false positives) 100% accuracy (0 false positives) |
Moussa and Youssef [42] | Moving Average-based Moving Variance-based MLE | IEEE 802.11b (2.4 GHz) | 2 TX 2 RX | Detection only | 25 m2 lab | RSS | Recall: ≤0.8 and Precision: 0.2–0.3 Recall: ≤0.8 and Precision: 0.2–0.4 Recall: 0.9 and Precision: ≤0.2 |
Lee et al. [43] | Fluctuation Histograms | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz) | 1 TX 1 RX | Detection only | 24 m2 meeting rooms | RSS | 100% with min 2, 0 and 2 false positives in 3 rooms respectively, with 10 detectable human motion events |
Kosba et al. [44] | RASID Moving Average-based Moving Variance-based MLE | IEEE 802.11b (2.4 GHz) | 4 TX 3 RX | Primarily detection | 186 m2 office floor two∼139 m2 home floors | RSS | F-measures Initial Experiment RASID: 0.96 (office) and 0.93 (home) M.A.: 0.86 (office) and 0.69 (home) M.A.: 0.86 (office) and 0.69 (home) MLE: 0.91 (office) and 0.94 (home) F-measures 2nd Experiment RASID: 0.94 (office) and 0.92 (home) M.A.: 0.84 (office) and 0.70 (home) M.V.: 0.74 (office) and 0.71 (home) MLE: 0.60 (office) and 0.65 (home) |
Xiao et al. [45] | FIMD RASID-like | IEEE 802.11n (2.4 GHz) | 1 TX 1 RX | Primarily detection | 77 m2 lab narrow 48.75 m2 corridor | CSI RSS | FIMD ≥90% with 14% false positives (lab) ≥70% with ≤1% false positives (lab) ≥90% and 9% false positives (corridor) RASID detection rate very slightly below FIMD |
Yuan et al. [46] | K-means clustering | IEEE 802.15.4 | 16 TRX | Classification 0-3,4-10,10+ | 324 m2 empty room | RSS | 94% (static crowd) 86% (moving crowd) |
Xi et al. [47] | FCC (Frog-Eye) | IEEE 802.11n (2.4 GHz) | 1 TX 4 (max) RX | Counting up to 30 people | multiple indoor and outdoor environments | CSI | 70% (error < 2, outdoor) 98% (error < 2, indoor) |
Depatla et al. [48] | Minimizing Kullback–Leibler | IEEE 802.11g (2.4 GHz) | 1 TX 1 RX | Counting up to 9 people | 70 m2 outdoor 33 m2 indoor | RSS | 96% (error < 2, omnidirectional, outdoor) 100% (error < 2, directional, outdoor) 63% (error < 2, omnidirectional, indoor) 100% (error < 2, directional, indoor) |
Fadhlullah and Ismail [49] | Statistical Approach | Zigbee (2.4 GHz) | 1 TX 3 RX | Classification low (5), medium (10 or 15) | 100 m2 indoor | RSS | 72.92% |
Di Domenico et al. [50] | LTE signals of opportunity | LTE (796 MHz) | 1 (LTE) TX 1 RX | Classification 0,1,2–3,4–5 | 45 m2 meeting room | RSRP | 79%, 92% and 76% (depending on receiver location) |
Cianca et al. [22] | Linear Discriminant Classifier | IEEE 802.11b (2.4 GHz) | 1 TX 1 RX | Counting up to 5 people | 30 m2 office 45 m2 meeting room | RRSS → CSI RSS | CSI: 72% (office) and 69% (meeting room) RSS: 70% (office) and 57% (meeting room) |
Di Domenico et al. [51] | Trained-once Linear Discriminant Classifier | IEEE 802.11n/g (2.4 GHz) | 1 TX 1 RX | Classification 0,1,2,3–4,5–7 | Three meeting rooms: small (30 m2), medium (45 m2) and large (75 m2) | CSI | 74% (small) 91% (error < 2, small) 52% (large) 81% (error < 2, large) |
Di Domenico et al. [51] | Trained-once Bayesian Classifier on derived Doppler Spectrum | IEEE 802.11n/g (2.4 GHz) | 1 TX 1 RX | Classification 0,1,2,3–4,5–7 | Three meeting rooms: small (30 m2), medium (45 m2) and large (75 m2) | CSI | 73% (small) 63% (large) |
Zou et al. [53] | WiFree | IEEE 802.11n (5 GHz) | 1 TX 1 RX | Counting up to 4, 7 and 11 people | 14 m2 discussion room 35 m2 conference room 56 m2 seminar room | CSI | 99.1% detection accuracy 92.8% counting accuracy |
Denis et al. [55] | Probabilistic Neural Network | DASH7 (433 MHz and 868 MHz) | 46 TRX | Classification Class 0–Class 6 Crowd sizes in 1000’s | 1755 m2 indoor festival stage | RSS | >90% (error ≤ 1 category) |
Reference | Technique(s) | Standard(s) | # of Nodes | Multitracking? | Environment(s) | Main Conclusions |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Wilson and Patwari [40] | Shadowing-based RTI | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz) | 28 TRX | Limited | 18.21 m2 open indoor | Shadowing-based RTI was shown to be a potential way of detecting human targets in an open test environment. No quantified accuracy was provided, however. |
Wilson and Patwari [41] | Shadowing-based RTI | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz) | 28 TRX | Limited | Semi-open 40.97 m2 outdoor (containing trees) | The validity of the concept of Shadowing-based RTI was shown to hold true in a more complex outdoor environment containing trees. When comparing two idealized images based on a cylindrical human model with two attenuation images provided by the RTI algorithm, total squared errors of 0.021 (1 target) and 0.036 (two targets) were obtained. |
Wilson et al. [57] | VRTI | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz) | 34 TRX | No | Indoor 72.46 m2 home (through-wall, most nodes outdoors) | 0.63 m and 0.45 m average tracking errors for respectively a moving target and a semi-stationary target indicated the feasibility of VRTI. RTI-based approaches were therefore shown to be viable for through-wall scenarios which did not require empty environment calibration. |
Zhao et al. [60] | SubVRT VRTI | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz) | 34 TRX | No | Indoor 72.46 m2 home (through-wall, most nodes outdoors) | SubVRT outperformed regular VRTI by 13.6% when using the same dataset as in [57]. When using a new dataset which contained large amounts of intrinsic motion caused by wind, subVRT outperformed VRTI by 40.5%, indicating the validity of the intrinsic—extrinsic motion concept. |
Zhao et al. [67] | HD-RTI/KRTI VRTI SMC | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz) | 34 TRX | No | Indoor 72.46 m2 home (through-wall, most nodes outdoors) 60 m2 bookstore | The proposed KRTI technique was shown to be the—at the time—only real-time RTI technique capable of tracking both stationary and moving targets in both through-wall and non-through-wall scenarios without requiring any kind of training or empty room calibration. |
Kaltiokallio et al. [68] | cdRTI PRR-multichannel RTI | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz) (5 channels) | 30 TRX | Very limited | Open 70 m2 indoor Complex lounge room (through-wall) | By utilizing multiple frequency channels, cdRTI became the first attenuation-based radio tomographic imaging technique capable of obtaining sub-meter accuracy in through-wall environments for stationary targets. |
Reference | Technique(s) | Standard(s) | # of Nodes | Multitracking? | Environment(s) | Main Conclusions |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Kaltiokallio et al. [62] | flRTI cdRTI | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz) (4-5 channels) | 30 TRX (open indoor) 33 TRX (apartment) 30 TRX (complex indoor) | No | Open 70 m2 indoor 58 m2 apartment Complex 70 m2 indoor (through-wall) | The experiments showed flRTI consistently outperforming cdRTI in regards to accuracy, even if the flRTI ellipse-width model was created based on measurements in a different environment. Additionally, the earlier observed feasibility of attenuation-based through-wall multi-frequency RTI systems was confirmed in this study as well. |
Bocca et al. [63] | flRTI (servo-nodes) (4 channels) | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz) | 13 TRX (servo, apartment) 26 TRX (regular, apartment) 14 TRX (servo, lab) 28 TRX (regular, lab) 12 TRX (servo, office) 24 TRX (regular, office) | No | 56 m2 apartment 54 m2 lab 100 m2 office space | The validity of the use of ’fade level’ as a concept within RTI was strenghtened by the results of this study, which showed reductions in localization errors between 30% and 37% when comparing servo-nodes to static nodes. |
Bocca et al. [58] | Multi-tracking and multi-channel RTI | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz) (4 channels in apartment,) 5 channels in open indoor and office) | 30 TRX (open indoor) 33 TRX (apartment) 32 TRX (office) | Yes | Open 70 m2 indoor 58 m2 apartment Complex 67 m2 office | Multi-tracking RTI was demonstrated to be viable for up to four targets. The largest average tracking errors were observed in the complex office environment and were equal to 0.45 m, 0.46 m and 0.55 m for respectively 2, 3 and 4 targets being simultaneously present. |
Adler et al. [70] | Shadowing-based RTI | Custom (cc1101) (868 MHz) | 20 TRX | No | 2 × 25 m2 open indoor | Results showed a maximum average localization error of 0.78 m for a single, stationary target (with Tikhonov regularisation), indicating the viability of sub-GHz frequencies for RTI. |
Wagner et al. [75,76] | Passive RFID-based RTI | Bistatic UHF passive RFID (868 MHz) | 36 transponders 4 reader antennas | No | Open 7.29 m2 indoor square | Within the inner environment surrounded by passive tags, a (real-time) mean localization error of 0.30 m was obtained. Localization could still occur outside this environment, with a mean localization error of 0.45 m. |
Jimenez et al. [64] | Shadowing-based RTI (DFL-RTI) DFL-PF Tagged trilateration | Active RFID (433 MHz) IEEE 802.15.4 (SPAN-Lab) (2.4 GHz) | 40 RFID tags 8 reader antennas 6 mobile tags/target 28 TRX (Span-Lab) | No | 16 m2 indoor home 40.97 m2 semi-open outdoor (SPAN-Lab) | Results indicated both DFL approaches generally outperforming the tagged solution, with the RTI system being slightly more accurate than their own proposed solution. This demonstrated the viability of 433 MHz for RTI. The combination of DFL and the tagged system was only beneficial if the total amount of reader antennas was drastically reduced to 3. |
Reference | Technique(s) | Standard(s) | # of Nodes | Multitracking? | Environment(s) | Main Conclusions |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Fink et al. [73] | Shadowing-based multi-frequency RTI (redundant RTI) | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz and 868 MHz) | 14 ’nodes’: 28 TRX (2.4 GHz) 28 TRX (868 MHz) | Limited | Complex 52 m2 lab | The combination of both frequencies significantly outperformed the equivalent single-frequency system, showing the potential of using multiple frequency bands. Additionally, multi-tracking with the proposed system was shown to be somewhat feasible, but no quantifiable data was provided. |
Denis et al. [71] | Shadowing-based single-frequency and multi-frequency RTI | DASH7 (433 MHz and 868 MHz) | 20 TRX (868 MHz) 20 TRX (433 MHz) | No | Empty 60 m2 classroom | A multi-frequency RTI system was proposed which utilized only sub-GHz frequencies—433 MHz and 868 MHz. In 97% of cases, the presence of a single stationary target was correctly detected. The target could then be located with an RMSE of 0.54 m. This result strengthened the validity of the concept of multi-frequency RTI. |
Denis et al. [74] | Shadowing-based multi-frequency RTI (variable ellipse ) | DASH7 (433 MHz and 868 MHz) | 37 TRX (868 MHz) (+ configurator and subcontroller) 37 TRX (433 MHz) (+ configurator and subcontroller) | Very limited | Complex 125 m2 2-room office (connected by hallway) | Rather poor accuracy results (especially for multiple static targets) for both techniques suggested that the proposed systems were too naive for use in highly complex environments. |
Kaltiokallio et al. [77] | ARTI flRTI | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz) (4 channels in open indoor,) 4–16 channels in apartment, lounge) | 30 TRX (open indoor) 33 TRX (apartment) 33 TRX (lounge) | No | 70 m2 open indoor 58 m2 single bedroom apartment 86 m2 lounge room (through-wall) | The proposed adaptive RTI system could adaptively update its parameters while active. Regular ARTI doubled the median localization accuracy when compared to flRTI, while the addition of a smoothing method to train the model parameters led to a threefold increase. |
Khaledi et al. [87] | Energy-efficient RTI (ellipse) Energy-efficient RTI (radius) Multi-channel shadowing-based RTI VRTI | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz) (5 channels in open indoor, 4 channels in cluttered office, 1 channel in bookstore) | 30 TRX (open indoor) 14 TRX (cluttered office) 34 TRX (bookstore) | No | 70 m2 open indoor 52 m2 cluttered office 55 m2 bookstore | The newly proposed methodologies caused an energy usage decrease between 50% and 80% without having any negative impact on accuracy. The radius-based approach even caused a limited accuracy increase. |
Reference | Technique(s) | Standard(s) | # of Nodes | Multitracking? | Environment(s) | Main Conclusions |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Li et al. [89] (simulations) Chen et al. [90] (experiments) | SMC Shadowing-based RTI | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz) | 24 TRX | No | 2 × Open 49 m2 outdoor (one containing tree) | The proposed DFL algorithm which made use of a particle filter (or sequential Monte Carlo method (SMC)) managed to obtain impressive accuracy-related results (0.49 m RMSE tree, 0.32 m RMSE treeless) when estimating the location of a single target. It consistently outperformed shadowing-based RTI in a direct comparison (0.86 m RMSE tree, 0.64 m RMSE treeless). Additionally, the second paper incorporated a methodology to successfully estimate unknown node locations. |
Wilson et al. [91] | Fade-level Skew-Laplace Strength Model for DFL | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz) | 34 TRX | Yes | Bookstore Home (through-wall) | The proposed non-imaging DFL technique obtained impressive average localization accuracies for both single and double targets in both environments. Only when simultaneously tracking two moving targets in the through-wall home environment was the average localization error higher than 1 m. |
Zheng and Men [92] | RSS model based on foreground detection | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz) | 24 TRX | No | Rectangular indoor room (through-wall) | An RMSE of 0.13 m was obtained when attempting to track a single moving target within the test environment. This clearly highlighted the potential of this technique which did not require the use of any type of offline training or calibration whatsoever. |
Zhang et al. [93] | RASS | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz) (multiple channels, 1 channel/hexagon) + Custom (Mica2 sensor board) (868 MHz) | 3 TRX/triangle 10TRX (total) | Limited (different triangles) | Open 400 m2 indoor | Within a single triangular setup with the nodes being spaced 4 m part on the ceiling, an average localization error of 1.13 m was observed for a single moving target. Given the scalability of this technique, this was an impressive result which clearly demonstrated its potential. |
Kaltiokallio et al. [101] | three-state RSS model SMC (EM) Exponential Rayleigh model | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz) | 1 TX 3 RX | No | 3 corridors of widths 2.0 m, 3.0 m and 3.5 m | The proposed three-state model consistently outperformed the other techniques in the corridor environments, showing the validity of this approach. |
Wang et al. [96] | Diffraction-based model Elliptical model Exponential Rayleigh model | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz) | 8 TRX | Yes | 12.39 m2 indoor hallway | The proposed methodology narrowly outperformed both the elliptical-model based approach and the exponential rayleigh-based approach when attempting to track two moving targets within the environment. RMSEs of 0.11–0.12 m were obtained for the diffraction-based approach, 0.20–0.18 m for the elliptical model and 0.17–0.15 m for the exponential Rayleigh model. |
Wang et al. [106] | BGA Fade-level Skew-Laplace CS-RTI | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz) | 16 TRX (+1 central node) | No | Open 64 m2 outdoor square | BGA significantly outperformed the other two algorithms both in regards to accuracy (0.155 m, 0.443 m and 0.322 m average localization error for BGA, fade level and CS-RTI respectively) as to the required running time when tracking a single moving target. |
Hillyard and Patwari [103] | MLL HMML RTI KRTI LDA | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz) | 20 TRX (classroom) 32 TRX (home) 15 TRX (basement) | No | Open Classroom Furnished floor of home Furnished basement | Both the MLL and HMML approaches reduced the localization error between 11% and 51% when compared to the other methodologies. Furthermore, this performance did not degrade as a result of both deliberate and non-deliberate changes made to the environment. |
Reference | Technique(s) | Standard(s) | # of Nodes | Multitracking? | Environment(s) | RSS/CSI? | Reported Accuracy |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Youssef et al. [6] | RSS histogram fingerprinting (Bayesian) | IEEE 802.11b (2.4 GHz) | 2 TX 2 RX | No | Lab (idealized) | RSS | 86.3%–89.7% fingerprint matching accuracy 0.21–0.16 m mean error (depending on training set) |
Seifeldin and Youssef [113] | Nuzzer (Bayesian) Deterministic Random | IEEE 802.11b (2.4 GHz) | 3 TX 2 RX (large office) 2 TX 3 RX (small office) 3 TX 4 RX (corridor) | Very Limited | 1500 m2 office 130 m2 office 24 m2 curved corridor | RSS | 2.9 m median error (Nuzzer, large office, discrete) 8.4 m median error (MDE, large office, discrete) 14 m (Random, large office, discrete) 1.82 m (Nuzzer, large office, continuous) 0.85 m (Nuzzer, small office, continuous) Multi-tracking shown to be potentially feasible |
Xu et al. [114] | LDA MED QDA | Custom (250 kbps, MSK-modulated) (433.1 MHz and 909.1 MHz) | 8 TX 8 RX 13 TX 9 RX | Limited (# of targets known) | 40 m2 apartment 150 m2 office | RSS | 90.1%—0.44 m median error (LDA, apartment) 81.7%—0.55 m median error (MED, apartment) 81.1%—0.53 m median error (QDA, apartment) 93.8%—1.4 m median error (LDA, office) 83.5%—0.89 m median error (LDA, apartment, 3 targets) 90% (LDA, apartment, 1-month old database, truncated correction) |
Xu et al. [117] | SCPL | Custom (250 kbps, MSK-modulated) (909.1 MHz) | 13 TX 9 RX 13 TX 9 RX | Yes | 150 m2 office 400 m2 open indoor | RSS | 84%—1.08 m average error (office) 86%—1.49 m average error (open indoor) |
Sabek et al. [120] | ACE Nuzzer SCPL SPOT | IEEE 802.11(?) (exact 802.11 protocol not specified) | 2 TX 3 RX | Yes | 114 m2 apartment 130 m2 office | RSS | 2.11 m median error (ACE, apartment, 1–3 targets) 1.44 m median error (ACE, office, 1–3 targets) 2.42 m median error (SCPL, apartment, 1–3 targets) 1.61 m median error (SCPL, office, 1–3 targets) 2.54 m median error (SPOT, apartment, 1–3 targets) 1.75 m median error (SPOT, office, 1–3 targets) 2.77 m median error (Nuzzer, apartment) 1.63 m median error (Nuzzer, office) |
Mager et al. [122] | KNN LDA SVM Random Forests | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz) (8 channels) | 30 TRX | No | 84 m2 home | RSS | 47.9% error rate (KNN) 16.1% error rate (LDA) 8.3% error rate (SVM) 3.5% error rate (Random Forests) 0.185% error rate (random forests channel optimization) |
Xiao et al. [109] | Pilot RASID Nuzzer | IEEE 802.11n | 2 TX 2 RX | No | 77 m2 lab L-shaped 776 m2 lobby | CSI | Accuracies up to 98% (Pilot, lab) 90% detection rate (Pilot, false positives ≥ 30%, lab) < 80% detection rate (RASID, false positives ≥ 30%, lab) Similar obeservations in lobby environment (slightly worse localization accuracy) |
Reference | Technique(s) | Standard(s) | # of Nodes | Set Size | Strangers? | Static/Moving | Environment(s) | RSS/CSI | Reported Accuracy |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Scholz et al. [7] | WiDisc | IEEE 802.15.4 (2.4 GHz) | 4 TRX | 3 | No | Static | 21.53 m2 lab | RSS | 67% (Simulated fingerprints) 76% (Measured fingerprints) |
Zhang et al.[128] | WiFi-ID | IEEE 802.11n (5 GHz) | 1 TX 1 RX | 2–6 | No | Moving | indoor corridor | CSI | 93% (set size 2) — 77% (set size 6) |
Zeng et al.[129] | WiWho | IEEE 802.11n | 1 TX 1 RX | 2–6 | Yes | Moving | 3 indoor environments | CSI | 92% (set size of 2) — 80% (set size 6) |
Xin et al.[130] | FreeSense | IEEE 802.11n (2.4 GHz) | 1 TX 1 RX | 2–6 | No | Moving | 30 m2 smart home | CSI | 94.5% (set size 2) — 88.9% (set size 6) |
Lv et al.[131] | Wii | IEEE 802.11n | 1 TX 1 RX | 2–8 | Yes | MovingMoving | 20 m2 meeting room | CSI | 98.7% (set size 2) — 90.9% (set size 8) |
WiWho | IEEE 802.11n | 1 TX 1 RX | 2–8 | Not used | Moving | CSI | 90%–95% (set size 2) — 65%–70% (set size of 8) | ||
Freesense | IEEE 802.11n | 1 TX 1 RX | 2–8 | No | Moving | CSI | 90%–95% (set size 2) — 75%–80% (set size 8) | ||
Chen et al. [9] | Rapid | IEEE 802.11(?) (not specified) | 1 TX 1 RX | 2–6 | Yes | Moving | 2 m-wide corridor 54 m2 lab 40 m2 meeting room | CSI + Acoustic | 92% (set size 2) - 82% (set size 6) |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Denis, S.; Berkvens, R.; Weyn, M. A Survey on Detection, Tracking and Identification in Radio Frequency-Based Device-Free Localization. Sensors 2019, 19, 5329. https://doi.org/10.3390/s19235329
Denis S, Berkvens R, Weyn M. A Survey on Detection, Tracking and Identification in Radio Frequency-Based Device-Free Localization. Sensors. 2019; 19(23):5329. https://doi.org/10.3390/s19235329
Chicago/Turabian StyleDenis, Stijn, Rafael Berkvens, and Maarten Weyn. 2019. "A Survey on Detection, Tracking and Identification in Radio Frequency-Based Device-Free Localization" Sensors 19, no. 23: 5329. https://doi.org/10.3390/s19235329
APA StyleDenis, S., Berkvens, R., & Weyn, M. (2019). A Survey on Detection, Tracking and Identification in Radio Frequency-Based Device-Free Localization. Sensors, 19(23), 5329. https://doi.org/10.3390/s19235329