Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T08:34:11.071Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Gaussian Message Passing-Based Cooperative Localisation with Bootstrap Percolation Scheme in Dense Networks

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 May 2019

Yangyang Liu ,
Baowang Lian ,
Lin Zhang  and
Taoyun Zhou
Yangyang Liu*
Affiliation:
(School of Electronics and Information, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi'an 710072, China)
Baowang Lian
Affiliation:
(School of Electronics and Information, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi'an 710072, China)
Lin Zhang
Affiliation:
(School of Electronics and Information, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi'an 710072, China)
Taoyun Zhou
Affiliation:
(School of Electronics and Information, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi'an 710072, China)
*
(E-mail: liu_yang90@163.com)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In dense networks, the tremendous computational complexity and communication overhead of cooperative localisation are the two main bottlenecks that limit practical application. In this study, we introduce a bootstrap percolation scheme into Gaussian message passing-based cooperative localisation for precise positioning, aimed at reducing the system overhead. Considering the uncertainty information and geometric distribution of neighbours, an approximate collinear detection criterion is proposed to detect the possible flip ambiguities in cooperative localisation. According to the detection result and our connection constraint, agents are divided into three categories and are approximated by different distribution families. A message passing rule is designed to control the propagation direction from high precision to low precision, thereby mitigating potential error propagation. Additionally, a layer-by-layer positioning mechanism is established where the agents are located gradually. Analytical and simulation results indicate that when the ranging standard deviation is 0·2 m, 89·3% of the agent nodes can be located within 0·4 m using the proposed algorithm. Compared with the Hybrid Sum-Product Algorithm over A Wireless Network (H-SPAWN), this ratio is increased by 8·4% and the computational complexity is reduced by 72%.

Keywords

Cooperative localizationBootstrap percolation schemeApproximate collinear detectionFlip ambiguities
Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Navigation , Volume 72 , Issue 5 , September 2019 , pp. 1275 - 1296
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Navigation 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Abouzar, P., Michelson, D. G. and Hamdi, M. (2016). RSSI-based Distributed Self-Localization for Wireless Sensor Networks Used in Precision Agriculture. IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, 15(10), 6638–6650.10.1109/TWC.2016.2586844Google Scholar
Bensimhoun, M. (2009). N-Dimensional cumulative function, and other useful facts about gaussians and normal densities. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a2/Cumulative_function_n_dimensional_Gaussians_12.2013.pdfGoogle Scholar
Caceres, M., Penna, F., Wymeersch, H. and Garello, R. (2011). Hybrid Cooperative Positioning Based on Distributed Belief Propagation. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 29(10), 1948–1958.Google Scholar
Cai, H., Gao, H., Lv, T., Lu, Y. and Su, X. (2014). Propagation Controlled Cooperative Positioning in Wireless Networks Using Bootstrap Percolation. Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE Global Communications Conference, Austin, USA.10.1109/GLOCOM.2014.7036844Google Scholar
Cui, J., Wang, Z., Zhang, C., Zhang, Y. and Zhu, Z. (2017). Message Passing Localization Algorithm Combining BP with VMP for Mobile Wireless Sensor Networks,” IET Communications, 11(7), 1106–1113.10.1049/iet-com.2016.0954Google Scholar
Dardari, D., Conti, A., Ferner, U., Giorgetti, A. and Win, M. Z. (2009). Ranging with Ultrawide Bandwidth Signals in Multipath Environments. Proceedings of the IEEE, 97(2), 404–426.Google Scholar
Das, K. and Wymeersch, H. (2012). Censoring for Bayesian Cooperative Positioning in Dense Wireless Networks. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 30(9), 1835–1842.Google Scholar
De Maesschalck, R., Jouan-Rimbaud, D and Massart, D. L. (2000). The Mahalanobis Distance. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, 50(1), 1–18.Google Scholar
Fan, Q., Sun, B., Sun, Y., Wu, Y. and Zhuang, X. (2017). Data Fusion for Indoor Mobile Robot Positioning Based on Tightly Coupled INS/UWB. The Journal of Navigation, 70(5), 1079–1097.Google Scholar
Georges, H. M., Xiao, Z. and Wang, D. (2016). Hybrid Cooperative Vehicle Positioning Using Distributed Randomized Sigma Point Belief Propagation on Non-Gaussian Noise Distribution. IEEE Sensors Journal, 16(21), 7803–7813.Google Scholar
Han, S., Yue, J., Meng, W. and Li, C. (2015). A Novel Flip Ambiguities Detection Algorithm for WSN Localization. Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE Globecom Workshops, San Diego, USA.Google Scholar
Ihler, A. T., Fisher, J. W., Moses, R. L. and Willsky, A. S. (2005). Nonparametric Belief Propagation for Self-Localization of Sensor Networks. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 23(4), 809–819.Google Scholar
Jing, H., Pinchin, J., Hill, C. and Moore, T. (2016). An Adaptive Weighting based on Modified DOP for Collaborative Indoor Positioning. The Journal of Navigation, 69(2), 225–245.Google Scholar
Kannan, A. A., Fidan, B. and Mao, G. (2010). Analysis of Flip Ambiguities for Robust Sensor Network Localization,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 59(4), 2057–2070.Google Scholar
Li, B., Wu, N., Wang, H., Tseng, P. H. and Kuang, J. (2015a). Gaussian Message Passing-Based Cooperative Localization on Factor Graph in Wireless Networks. Signal Processing, 111, 1–12.Google Scholar
Li, S., Hedley, M. and Collings, I. B. (2015b). New Efficient Indoor Cooperative Localization Algorithm with Empirical Ranging Error Model. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 33(7), 1407–1417.10.1109/JSAC.2015.2430273Google Scholar
Lv, T., Gao, H., Li, X., Yang, S. and Hanzo, L. (2016). Space-Time Hierarchical-Graph Based Cooperative Localization in Wireless Sensor Networks. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 64(2), 322–334.Google Scholar
Meyer, F., Hlinka, O. and Hlawatsch, F. (2014). Sigma Point Belief Propagation. IEEE Signal Processing Letter, 21(2), 145–149.Google Scholar
Rantakokko, J., Rydell, J., Stromback, P., Handel, P., Callmer, J. and Tornqvist, D. (2011). Accurate and Reliable Soldier and First Responder Indoor Positioning: Multisensor Systems and Cooperative Localization. IEEE Wireless Communications, 18(2), 10–18.Google Scholar
Vaze, R. and Gupta, P. (2012). Bounds on Minimum Number of Anchors for Iterative Localization and Its Connections to Bootstrap Percolation. Proceedings of the 2012 International Conference on Signal Processing and Communications, Bangalore, India.10.1109/SPCOM.2012.6290244Google Scholar
Velde, S. V., Abreu, T. F. and Steendam, H. (2015). Improved Censoring and NLOS Avoidance for Wireless Localization in Dense Networks. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 33(11), 2302–2312.Google Scholar
Wang, L., Groves, P. and Ziebart, M. (2015). Smartphone Shadow Matching for Better Cross-street GNSS Positioning in Urban Environments. The Journal of Navigation, 68(1), 411–433.Google Scholar
Wang, X., Liu, Y., Yang, Z., Lu, K. and Luo, J. (2013). OFA: An Optimistic Approach to Conquer Flip Ambiguity in Network Localization. Computer Networks, 57(6), 1529–1544.Google Scholar
Wymeersch, H., Lien, J. and Win, M. Z. (2009). Cooperative Localization in Wireless Networks. Proceedings of the IEEE, 97(2), 427–450.Google Scholar