LoRa‐aided outdoor localization system: RSSI or TDoA?

Abstract

Internet of Things (IoT) is a hot research topic, and typically involves communication between small devices in order to sense, react, and reinvent our way of living. To this end, the localization of such small devices is of great importance for most applications. Between the many applications of IoT, there are those which require low power communication between long ranges, which are entitled Low Power Wide Area (LPWA) communications. One of the main LPWA technologies is the Long Range (LoRa), which does not support native localization. In order to overcome such a problem, a possible approach is to use the Global Positioning Systems (GPS), but it can be costly when aiming for cheaper and simpler devices. This paper evaluates the accuracy of a LoRa-aided outdoor localization system when locating GPS-free Target Nodes (TN) through the use of Anchor Nodes (AN) with known positions. Two different indicators are used, namely the Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI) and the Time Difference of Arrival (TDoA). Our results indicate that, in general, TDoA presents an improved accuracy over RSSI, with errors ranging from 66 to 253 m in the considered scenario.

Remote Pedestrian Localization Systems for Resource-Constrained Environments: A Systematic Review

“…This is because they offer a good balance of coverage and accuracy in comparison to other wireless technologies such as infrared or ultrasonic-based localization systems [32]. Examples on RF-based navigation technologies include: Wi-Fi [62], [63], [66], Bluetooth [46], [47], [49], [68], ZigBee [48], [50], UWB [65], GNSS [51]- [69], [108], [109], and LPWANs [38]- [44], [46], [69]- [71], [110] RF localization methods often leverage wireless network infrastructure that is initially deployed for communication purposes (e.g., LPWANs, Wi-Fi). They translate signal characteristics such as RSS and Time of Flight (ToF) and combine these estimates to determine the location of a wireless device or object.…”

“…Finally, the remaining works were checked against the eligibility criteria in the eligibility phase to obtain a final set of included articles. We included only 37 articles [38]- [71], [108]- [110] in our review for the complete analysis, and this represents about 5% of the initial number.…”

“…The LoRaWAN data rate is between 300bps and 50kbps, depending on the spreading factor and channel bandwidth [21], [73]. The authors in [38]- [44], [49], [52], [54]- [56], [58], [59], [65], [67]- [71], [109], [110] used LoRaWAN as a communication network representing 64% of all the studies in this review. For example, [49] 3) WLAN (Wi-Fi) Communication Technologies…”

“…In this review, LPWAN technologies were used for both localization and communication. 33% of the studies in this review [38]- [46], [69]- [71], [110] used the LPWAN technologies for localization and 64% for communication purposes. LoRaWAN [38]- [44], [46], [69]- [71], [110] was the most preferred for both localization and communication because it uses open standards, and also operates in Africa in relation to Sigfox [41], [45], and was used in only two papers.…”

Human Activity Mining in Multi-Occupancy Contexts Based on Nearby Interaction Under a Fuzzy Approach

“…Real-Time Location Systems (RTLS) enhance and support sensors to identify users [7,32]. RTLS leverages techniques such as the time difference of arrival (TDoA) and the received signal strength indicator (RSSI) to accurately calculate positions based on the signals received by the anchors from the tags [33][34][35]. Using multiple anchors allows the system to achieve high-accuracy positioning [36,37].…”