ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Enhancing Localization Accuracy and Reducing Processing Time in Indoor Positioning Systems: A Comparative Analysis of AI Models.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative study of indoor positioning datasets focusing on localization accuracy success rate and floor classification.Scientific reports · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper presents a comparative study of different AI models for indoor positioning systems, emphasizing improvements in localization accuracy and processing time. This study examines Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs), Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM), Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs), and the Kalman filter using a real Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI) and 9-axis ICM-20948 sensor. An in-depth analysis is provided in this paper for data cleaning and feature selection to reduce errors for all the models. We evaluate these models in terms of localization accuracy and prediction time. The RNN model shows the best performance, achieving a localization error of 0.247 m with a delay of 0.077 s per position location for an area of 12 m × 9.5 m using four anchors. This research highlights the importance of selecting AI models for effective mobile tracking according to test and validation data.
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.