Next Article in Journal
Control Design and Digital Implementation of a Fast 2-Degree-of-Freedom Translational Optical Image Stabilizer for Image Sensors in Mobile Camera Phones
Next Article in Special Issue
An Improved Indoor Positioning System Using RGB-D Cameras and Wireless Networks for Use in Complex Environments
Previous Article in Journal
Etched Polymer Fibre Bragg Gratings and Their Biomedical Sensing Applications
Previous Article in Special Issue
On Efficient Deployment of Wireless Sensors for Coverage and Connectivity in Constrained 3D Space
Article Menu
Issue 10 (October) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Sensors 2017, 17(10), 2327; doi:10.3390/s17102327

Comparing the Performance of Indoor Localization Systems through the EvAAL Framework

1
ISTI Institute of CNR, Pisa 56124, Italy
2
Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI), Daejeon 34129, Korea
3
Centre for Automation and Robotics, CSIC-UPM, Arganda del Rey 28500, Spain
4
Institute of New Imaging Technologies, Universitat Jaume I, Castellón de la Plana 12071, Spain
5
University of Alcalá, Department of Electronics, Alcalá de Henares 28871, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 31 August 2017 / Revised: 27 September 2017 / Accepted: 10 October 2017 / Published: 13 October 2017
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [18229 KB, uploaded 20 October 2017]   |  

Abstract

In recent years, indoor localization systems have been the object of significant research activity and of growing interest for their great expected social impact and their impressive business potential. Application areas include tracking and navigation, activity monitoring, personalized advertising, Active and Assisted Living (AAL), traceability, Internet of Things (IoT) networks, and Home-land Security. In spite of the numerous research advances and the great industrial interest, no canned solutions have yet been defined. The diversity and heterogeneity of applications, scenarios, sensor and user requirements, make it difficult to create uniform solutions. From that diverse reality, a main problem is derived that consists in the lack of a consensus both in terms of the metrics and the procedures used to measure the performance of the different indoor localization and navigation proposals. This paper introduces the general lines of the EvAAL benchmarking framework, which is aimed at a fair comparison of indoor positioning systems through a challenging competition under complex, realistic conditions. To evaluate the framework capabilities, we show how it was used in the 2016 Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN) Competition. The 2016 IPIN competition considered three different scenario dimensions, with a variety of use cases: (1) pedestrian versus robotic navigation, (2) smartphones versus custom hardware usage and (3) real-time positioning versus off-line post-processing. A total of four competition tracks were evaluated under the same EvAAL benchmark framework in order to validate its potential to become a standard for evaluating indoor localization solutions. The experience gained during the competition and feedback from track organizers and competitors showed that the EvAAL framework is flexible enough to successfully fit the very different tracks and appears adequate to compare indoor positioning systems. View Full-Text
Keywords: indoor localization; indoor navigation; indoor competition; standard evaluation metrics; benchmarking; performance evaluation; Active and Assisted Living; smartphone sensors; pedestrian dead deckoning indoor localization; indoor navigation; indoor competition; standard evaluation metrics; benchmarking; performance evaluation; Active and Assisted Living; smartphone sensors; pedestrian dead deckoning
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Scifeed alert for new publications

Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
  • Get alerts for new papers matching your research
  • Find out the new papers from selected authors
  • Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
  • Define your Scifeed now

SciFeed Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Potortì, F.; Park, S.; Jiménez Ruiz, A.R.; Barsocchi, P.; Girolami, M.; Crivello, A.; Lee, S.Y.; Lim, J.H.; Torres-Sospedra, J.; Seco, F.; Montoliu, R.; Mendoza-Silva, G.M.; Pérez Rubio, M.D.C.; Losada-Gutiérrez, C.; Espinosa, F.; Macias-Guarasa, J. Comparing the Performance of Indoor Localization Systems through the EvAAL Framework. Sensors 2017, 17, 2327.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Sensors EISSN 1424-8220 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top