ArticleBiomimetics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Few-Shot Learning in Wi-Fi-Based Indoor Positioning.
Article in Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper explores the use of few-shot learning in Wi-Fi-based indoor positioning, utilizing convolutional neural networks (CNNs) combined with meta-learning techniques to enhance the accuracy and efficiency of positioning systems. The focus is on addressing the challenge of limited labeled data, a prevalent issue in extensive indoor environments. The study explores various scenarios, comparing the performance of the base CNN and meta-learning models. The meta-learning approach involves few-shot learning tasks, such as three-way N-shot, five-way N-shot, etc., to enhance the model's ability to generalize from limited data. The experiments were conducted across various scenarios, evaluating the performance of the models with different numbers of samples per class (K) after filtering by cosine similarity (FCS) during both the stages of data preprocessing and meta-learning. The scenarios included both base classes and novel classes, with and without meta-learning. The results indicated that the base CNN model achieved varying accuracy levels depending on the scenario and the number of samples per class retained after FCS. Meta-learning performed acceptably in scenarios with fewer samples, which are the distinct datasets pertaining to novel classes. With 20 samples per class, the base CNN achieved an accuracy of 0.80 during the pre-training stage, while meta-learning (three-way one-shot) achieved an accuracy of 0.78 on a new small dataset with novel classes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.