ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Theories and Methods for Indoor Positioning Systems: A Comparative Analysis, Challenges, and Prospective Measures.
Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Indoor Localization Algorithm Based on Information Gain Ratio and Affinity Propagation Clustering.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Indoor Positioning Systems as Critical Infrastructure: An Assessment for Enhanced Location-Based Services.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Cost-Efficient RSSI-Based Indoor Proximity Positioning, for Large/Complex Museum Exhibition Spaces.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- On Fusing Wireless Fingerprints with Pedestrian Dead Reckoning to Improve Indoor Localization Accuracy.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In the era of the Internet of Things (IoT), the demand for accurate positioning services has become increasingly critical, as location-based services (LBSs) depend on users' location data to deliver contextual functionalities. While the Global Positioning System (GPS) is widely regarded as the standard for outdoor localization due to its reliability and comprehensive coverage, its effectiveness in indoor positioning systems (IPSs) is limited by the inherent complexity of indoor environments. This paper examines the various measurement techniques and technological solutions that address the unique challenges posed by indoor environments. We specifically focus on three key aspects: (i) a comparative analysis of the different wireless technologies proposed for IPSs based on various methodologies, (ii) the challenges of IPSs, and (iii) forward-looking strategies for future research. In particular, we provide an in-depth evaluation of current IPSs, assessing them through multidimensional matrices that capture diverse architectural and design considerations, as well as evaluation metrics established in the literature. We further examine the challenges that impede the widespread deployment of IPSs and highlight the potential risk that these systems may not be recognized with a single, universally accepted standard method, unlike GPS for outdoor localization, which serves as the golden standard for positioning. Moreover, we outline several promising approaches that could address the existing challenges of IPSs. These include the application of transfer learning, feature engineering, data fusion, multisensory technologies, hybrid techniques, and ensemble learning methods, all of which hold the potential to significantly enhance the accuracy and reliability of IPSs. By leveraging these advanced methodologies, we aim to improve the overall performance of IPSs, thus paving the way for more robust and dependable LBSs in indoor environments.
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.