Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41374666›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Bias Normalization for Sensors in Smart Devices.

Wonjoon Son, Lynn Choi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Wonjoon SonSchool of Electrical Engineering, Korea University, Seoul 02841, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0009-0006-9312-197X
Lynn ChoiSchool of Electrical Engineering, Korea University, Seoul 02841, Republic of Korea.

Funding

Defense Acquisition Program Administration 915073201Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport RS-2022-00143494
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Modern electronic devices, such as smartphones and drones, integrate various sensors to enable diverse sensor-based applications. Yet, sensor measurements exhibit significant variations across different device models, even under the same environment. These variations arise from sensor biases, which occur in three different types: offset bias (additive constant errors), scale bias (multiplicative proportional errors), and drift bias (time-dependent or temperature-dependent errors). Among the biases, in this paper we specifically target offset bias, which has the greatest impact in typical smartphone usage scenarios. This generally leads to performance degradation in sensor-based applications across various device models and instances. To understand the characteristics of the offset bias, we categorize sensors into sensors with and without absolute reference values. Sensors with absolute references enable direct calibration using theoretical true values, while sensors with relative references require different approaches depending on how sensor applications process the data. For scalar-based applications that determine the current state by comparing a sensor measurement against a pre-defined reference, the offset biases can be removed by the existing procedures using reference devices. However, for sequence-based applications that determine the current state by analyzing relative changes in a sequence, the offset bias issue has not been addressed yet. We propose initial value removal and mean removal algorithms that statically and dynamically remove the offset biases from the sensor data sequences for these sequence-based applications. We evaluate our bias normalization algorithms for two different use cases in a geomagnetic-based indoor positioning system (IPS). First, we evaluate the impact of our bias normalization algorithms on the positioning performance of our LSTM-based IPS. Without bias normalization, although the reference device (Galaxy S23 Plus) showed an average positioning error of 0.6 m, the other three smartphone models (Galaxy S22 Plus, iPhone 15, and iPhone 16 Pro) exhibited much worse positioning performance, with errors of 2.48 m, 18.21 m, and 13.13 m. However, after applying our bias normalization, the average positioning errors of all models dropped below 0.68 m. Second, we also evaluate the impact of the bias normalization on detecting whether the position of a smartphone is in a pocket or in a hand-held state. For this, we analyze the sequence of light sensor measurements. We improved the detection accuracy from 42.3% to 97.6% with bias normalization across all device models without requiring individual threshold settings.

Indexed as

bias normalizationdrift biasindoor positioningoffset biasscale biassensor bias

Identifiers

PMID41374666
PMCPMC12693860

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.