2015
DOI: 10.1109/tsp.2015.2394300
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cooperative Localization in WSNs Using Gaussian Mixture Modeling: Distributed ECM Algorithms

Abstract: Abstract-We study cooperative sensor network localization in a realistic scenario where (1) the underlying measurement errors more probably follow a non-Gaussian distribution; (2) the measurement error distribution is unknown without conducting massive offline calibrations; and (3) non-line-of-sight identification is not performed due to the complexity constraint and/or storage limitation. The underlying measurement error distribution is approximated parametrically by a Gaussian mixture with finite number of c… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
37
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
2

Relationship

4
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 74 publications
(37 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
0
37
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the first category, the positions (and model parameters if any) are assumed to be deterministic but unknown, and only a deterministic point estimate is provided for each unknown parameter. Classical approaches, to mention some, include the maximum likelihood (ML) approach [1], convex-optimizationbased algorithms [7]- [12], multidimensional scaling (MDS) D. Jin [13], [14] and expectation-conditional maximization (ECM) [15]. On the other hand, the class of Bayesian approaches treat the positions as random variables and formulate cooperative localization as a probabilistic inference problem.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the first category, the positions (and model parameters if any) are assumed to be deterministic but unknown, and only a deterministic point estimate is provided for each unknown parameter. Classical approaches, to mention some, include the maximum likelihood (ML) approach [1], convex-optimizationbased algorithms [7]- [12], multidimensional scaling (MDS) D. Jin [13], [14] and expectation-conditional maximization (ECM) [15]. On the other hand, the class of Bayesian approaches treat the positions as random variables and formulate cooperative localization as a probabilistic inference problem.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In non-Bayesian algorithms, e.g. Expectation-Maximization (EM) [21], and its variant, Expectation-Conditional Maximization (ECM) [22], the unknown positions are treated as deterministic, while in Bayesian algorithms, e.g. Nonparametric Belief Propagation (NBP) [23], Sum-Product Algorithm over Wireless Networks (SPAWN) [24,25] and its variant Sigma-Point SPAWN [26], the unknown positions are assumed to be random variables with a known prior distribution.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Among various works handling the NLoS effect, a majority of them have treated the NLoS meaures as outliers and tried to neglect or mitigate their effect, including the Maximum Likelihood (ML)-based approach [31,32], the Weighted Least-Squares (WLS) estimator [33,32], the constrained localization techniques [34,35], robust estimators [36,37] and the method based on virtual stations [38]. In contrast to these works, several approaches, including [39,21,22], have proposed specific probabilistic models for the NLoS measures, therewith exploiting the NLoS measures for the localization purpose. In the light of these considerations, our aim is to develop an RSS-based, cooperative localization framework that works in mixed LoS/NLoS environments, requires no knowledge on parameters of the propagation model, and can be realized in a distributed manner.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Among different types of methods as surveyed in [1], the SPAWN algorithm [2] is a promising solution. To reduce computational complexity and communication load, many variants have been built upon it.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%