Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29156565›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2017

Survey on the Performance of Source Localization Algorithms.

José Manuel Fresno, Guillermo Robles, Juan Manuel Martínez-Tarifa, Brian G Stewart

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

José Manuel FresnoDepartment of Electrical Engineering, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Avda, Universidad, 30, Leganés, 28911 Madrid, Spain. jfresno@ing.uc3m.es.
Guillermo RoblesDepartment of Electrical Engineering, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Avda, Universidad, 30, Leganés, 28911 Madrid, Spain. grobles@ing.uc3m.es.ORCID 0000-0002-2688-9202
Juan Manuel Martínez-TarifaDepartment of Electrical Engineering, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Avda, Universidad, 30, Leganés, 28911 Madrid, Spain. jmmtarif@ing.uc3m.es.ORCID 0000-0001-9671-9818
Brian G StewartDepartment of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, University of Strathclyde, 204 George Street, Glasgow G1 1XW, UK. brian.stewart.100@strath.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The localization of emitters using an array of sensors or antennas is a prevalent issue approached in several applications. There exist different techniques for source localization, which can be classified into multilateration, received signal strength (RSS) and proximity methods. The performance of multilateration techniques relies on measured time variables: the time of flight (ToF) of the emission from the emitter to the sensor, the time differences of arrival (TDoA) of the emission between sensors and the pseudo-time of flight (pToF) of the emission to the sensors. The multilateration algorithms presented and compared in this paper can be classified as iterative and non-iterative methods. Both standard least squares (SLS) and hyperbolic least squares (HLS) are iterative and based on the Newton-Raphson technique to solve the non-linear equation system. The metaheuristic technique particle swarm optimization (PSO) used for source localisation is also studied. This optimization technique estimates the source position as the optimum of an objective function based on HLS and is also iterative in nature. Three non-iterative algorithms, namely the hyperbolic positioning algorithms (HPA), the maximum likelihood estimator (MLE) and Bancroft algorithm, are also presented. A non-iterative combined algorithm, MLE-HLS, based on MLE and HLS, is further proposed in this paper. The performance of all algorithms is analysed and compared in terms of accuracy in the localization of the position of the emitter and in terms of computational time. The analysis is also undertaken with three different sensor layouts since the positions of the sensors affect the localization; several source positions are also evaluated to make the comparison more robust. The analysis is carried out using theoretical time differences, as well as including errors due to the effect of digital sampling of the time variables. It is shown that the most balanced algorithm, yielding better results than the other algorithms in terms of accuracy and short computational time, is the combined MLE-HLS algorithm.

Indexed as

Bancroftcombined algorithmemitter localizationhyperbolic least squareshyperbolic positioningmaximum likelihood estimatorparticle swarm optimizationsource localizationstandard least squares

Identifiers

PMID29156565
PMCPMC5713470

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.