3.8 Article

LoRaWAN-implemented node localisation based on received signal strength indicator

期刊

IET WIRELESS SENSOR SYSTEMS
卷 13, 期 4, 页码 117-132

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1049/wss2.12039

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper evaluates the performance of LoRaWAN Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI)-based node localisation in a sandstorm environment. The authors utilize machine learning algorithms to create unique signatures representing different locations. The proposed method reduces node localisation complexity and improves performance compared to GPS-based approaches.
Long Range Wireless Area Network (LoRaWAN) provides desirable solutions for Internet of Things (IoT) applications that require hundreds or thousands of actively connected devices (nodes) to monitor the environment or processes. In most cases, the location information of the devices arguably plays a critical role and is desirable. In this regard, the physical characteristics of the communication channel can be leveraged to provide a feasible and affordable node localisation solution. This paper presents an evaluation of the performance of LoRaWAN Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI)-based node localisation in a sandstorm environment. The authors employ machine learning algorithms, Support Vector Regression and Gaussian Process Regression, which turn the high variance of RSSI due to frequency hopping feature of LoRaWAN to advantage, creating unique signatures representing different locations. In this work, the RSSI features are used as input location fingerprints into the machine learning models. The proposed method reduces node localisation complexity when compared to GPS-based approaches whilst provisioning more extensive connection paths. Furthermore, the impact of LoRa spreading factor and kernel function on the performance of the developed models have been studied. Experimental results show that the SVR-enhanced fingerprint yields the most significant improvement in node localisation performance.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据