2007
DOI: 10.1109/tsp.2006.885744
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Source Localization Using TDOA and FDOA Measurements in the Presence of Receiver Location Errors: Analysis and Solution

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
335
0
2

Year Published

2009
2009
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 507 publications
(339 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
2
335
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The last three constraints are basically obtained from the physical limitations, and they are optional and will be removed if the bounds for are not available. Without loss of information, these three constraints can be combined as (37) With the use of (37), we perform relaxation on (36) and note that has the same effect of to obtain the SDP relaxation algorithm for node localization with unknown propagation speed: s.t. (38) In principle, when noise is absent.…”
Section: Node Localization With Unknown Propagation Speedmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The last three constraints are basically obtained from the physical limitations, and they are optional and will be removed if the bounds for are not available. Without loss of information, these three constraints can be combined as (37) With the use of (37), we perform relaxation on (36) and note that has the same effect of to obtain the SDP relaxation algorithm for node localization with unknown propagation speed: s.t. (38) In principle, when noise is absent.…”
Section: Node Localization With Unknown Propagation Speedmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While in underground WSNs [29] and in-solid scenarios [30] where seismic/vibrational sensor data are processed, the propagation speed is unknown and depends strongly on the propagation medium [31], [32]. In fact, localization of single or noncollaborative sources with anchor location errors have been addressed in [33]- [37] which show that positioning accuracy will be improved when the receiver location uncertainty is taken into account. Recently, a pioneering work for the scenario of WSNs has been presented in [13].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The computational times of the proposed SDR algorithm and [15] are 0.92 s and 0.78 s, respectively. Figure 9 shows the MSEs when there is receiver position uncertainty and the results of [16] are also included. The performance of the proposed scheme is in between [15] and [16], and all cannot attain CRLB.…”
Section: Draft V Simulation Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In practice, the receiver positions may not be known perfectly [15] and treating them to be exact may lead to degradation of estimation accuracy [16]- [17]. In this section, we take the receiver position DRAFT uncertainty into account in the algorithm development.…”
Section: B Extension To Receiver Position Uncertaintymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Estimating the location of an emitter from a combination of TDOA and FDOA measurements is a highly nonlinear problem. This measurement obtained by a number of sensors is used in an over-determined situation to estimate instantaneous position and velocity of the emitter [6]- [7].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%