2019 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), 30 Sept. - 3 Oct.

2019, Pisa, Italy

A Smartphone Indoor Localization Using Inertial

Sensors and Single Wi-Fi Access Point
Tuan D. Vy, Thu L. N. Nguyen, and Yoan Shin†
School of Electronic Engineering, Soongsil University, Seoul 06978, Korea
Email: {tuanvyduc, thunguyen, yashin}@ssu.ac.kr
(† Corresponding author)

Abstract—This study focuses on indoor localization of a
smartphone (e.g., iPhone 7) by using its inertial sensors and
a currently-connected Wi-Fi access point (AP). In the situations
where the density of APs is low, the inertial sensors provide a
way to localize the users smartphone, while the AP plays as a
reference point and an additional source to provide a starting
point for the user tracking its movements. We propose a new
indoor localization scheme called the pedestrian dead reckoning
with step compensation that can be implemented on mobile
devices with limited resources. In order to test our localization
scheme, we perform several experiments to track a mobile user
in one of the largest shopping malls in Korea using public Wi-Fi
network services. The results show that the successful localization
percentage is about 92% within 2 m error, which is highly
accurate with acceptable measurement errors.
Index Terms—indoor localization; Wi-Fi fingerprinting; pedes-
trian dead reckoning; drifting effect reduction; step-heading-
system tracking
I. I NTRODUCTION
Location information plays a vital role in many applications
such as asset tracking, transportation monitoring, etc. The
aim of the localization task is to identify the location of a
mobile user within an area of interest. With the popularity of
smartphones, global positioning system (GPS) is a straight-
forward solution but it has two main limitations for indoor
users [1], [2]. First, there are several factors preventing the
GPS receivers from functioning indoors such as attenuation,
multipath reflections by the walls, floors, or ceilings. Second,
it takes large cost to equip a GPS receiver as well as consume
lots of energy during the localization process. Meanwhile,
indoor localization scenarios become more self localization,
i.e., the mobile user receives signals from the access point
(AP) and interprets the signals as an ambient source to localize
its location in a local coordinate system. Thus, developing
energy-aware localization function in indoor environment with
a good performance is needed according to application-specific
requirements.
Regarding hardware capability, we classify the indoor mea-
surement techniques into several categories in terms of signal
characteristics: Wi-Fi, RFID, Bluetooth, mmWave, sound, im-
age, visible light, smartphone dead reckoning, and magnetism
This work was in part supported by the NRF grant funded by the Korea
government (MSIT) (2016R1A2B2014497), and by the MSIT, Korea, under
the ITRC support program (IITP-2019-2018-0-01424) supervised by the IITP.
978-1-7281-1788-1/19/$31.00 © 2019 IEEE
[1]–[5]. In practice, in order to provide accurate location
tracking and to support other management tasks, it may
require a hybrid mode localization among those infrastruc-
tures, which is still an open research area. In general, a
typical localization algorithm includes three steps: distance
measurement, location estimation and calibration. In the first
step, the estimated distance can be obtained from several
received signal information such as angle of arrival (AoA),
time of arrival (ToA), time difference of arrival (TDoA),
received signal strength indication (RSSI), or any combination
of them [6]. The second step processes the range information
to estimate the user location associated with other optimization
approaches (e.g., maximum likelihood, least-squares, semi-
definite programming) [7]. Finally, the estimated location is
refined by applying calibration methods such as iteration
refinement to improve the accuracy. Among measurement
techniques, the RSSI is considered as a cheap solution because
it is quite easy to obtain and does not require extra antenna
array as AoA or time synchronization as ToA and ToA. In
order to transform a physical measurement to the location,
RSSI localization methods utilize RSS measurement data for
location estimation. Assuming that the RSS distribution of
a set of reference nodes is relatively stable over the area
of interest, an RSS vector measured by an unknown node
is defined as an RSS fingerprint. The location of the node
can be estimated base on the existing RSS profile. To use the
RSS fingerprint, the system needs to conduct a site survey by
recording the RSS measurements at several reference points
in the area and store them as a database.
In this paper, we adopt a fusion approach between Wi-Fi and
smartphone dead reckoning to perform self-localization and
tracking the smartphones, in particular iPhones. We develop
an indoor localization scheme called the pedestrian dead
reckoning with step compensation (PDRSC). In this scheme,
a localization system consists of three main parts: (i) infras-
tructure of the building; (ii) mobile user (smartphone); (iii)
localization engine. Depending on the infrastructure installed
in the building, each one comes with a set of parameters
such as measurement data, cover area, and noise type. The
localization engine plays a local server which provides a
certain information for the area of interest and directs the
mobile user in some cases. It also responses to localization
requests and offers input data (e.g., building digital map, AP
location). This information will be used for location estimation
2019 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), 30 Sept. - 3 Oct. 2019, Pisa, Italy
at the mobile user. In order to perform tracking task, the
smartphone’s inertial sensors will be used to calculate the
number of user steps and combine with the outputs from Wi-
Fi for reducing noise effects caused by user’s walking style
and by smartphone handing position.
The organization of the paper is as follows. The related
works and the motivation of this paper are described in Section
II. A robust self-localization scheme in the cooperation of Wi-
Fi and smartphone dead-reckoning is presented in Section III.
Experimental results are demonstrated in Section IV, followed
by conclusions in Section V.
II. R ELATED W ORKS AND M OTIVATION
A. Related Works
Regarding how to obtain user’s smartphone location, prox-
imity sensing [8] is the simplest method in which user location
is assigned to the closest AP with the highest RSS. In terms of
geometry, the multilateration [9] calculates the user location
by using a relative measurement set of at least three APs. A
big disadvantage of the proximity sensing method is that its
accuracy highly depends on the AP density, while the multilat-
eration often requires line-of-sight measurements between the
APs and the user, which is impractical in indoor environments.
Specially, when the AP density in the environment is low, the
smartphone may not fall in either the coverage range of any
AP or the intersection among their ranges. Fig. 1 gives an
example of such scenario.
Fig. 1. An example of low AP density scenario.
Recently, Wi-Fi fingerprint-based localization method is
a common approach for indoor mobile devices. Assuming
that an area of interest is covered by Wi-Fi signals, the
fingerprinting method consists of two phases: offline phase and
online phase. In the offline phase, a smartphone records the
Wi-Fi APs and collects their signals for several predetermined
locations called the reference points (RPs) [3]. At each RP,
a set of RSS readings containing the RP coordinate, its RSS
values from multiple APs, is stored in a local server. The actual
localization takes place in the online phase. A smartphone
which is carried by the user collects the RSS readings from
different APs, matches them with the stored database from
the offline phase, and estimates its location by using different
methods (e.g., k-nearest neighbor or maximum a posterior).
On the other hand, in order to develop a mobility-assisted
localization, the pedestrian dead reckoning (PDR) with inertial
sensors were proposed in [8]–[11] to provide meter-level
tracking. In this case, the current location of a moving user
depends on the past locations and its movement. Although
the inertial sensors enabled in the smartphones reveal the
information on the user mobility such as walking steps and
trajectories, they are easily affected by sensor placements or
complex human locomotion. In the summary, the combination
of the Wi-Fi fingerprinting and the inertial sensors not only
opens great possibilities in location-based services on the mo-
bile devices and the upgrades Wi-Fi-based indoor localization
into a higher level, but also integrates into more complex
issues such as incorrect step counting according to speed
variation and smartphone placement [12], [13], and fingerprint
mismatch [14], [15].
B. Issues and Motivation
One big problem of the current Wi-Fi fingerprinting ap-
proach is that we need to conduct building survey by recording
all the RSS readings at each RP with respect to several user’s
orientation, so that the RSS-location-direction database takes
a lot of effort to build as well as to maintain, while it does
not guarantee to handle the mobility of the user [3]. While in
the inertial sensor based localization approach the distance can
be computed by estimating the number of user’s steps. This
method provides us a simple way but the localization accuracy
depends on the user’s waking pattern and speed [16]–[18].
Therefore, we make two key modifications in our localization
scheme: RSS profile for all APs and auto-correction of user
stride. First, we use a mobile device to collect RSS profile at
all APs in the building. The AP locations and its RSS profile
will be used for location estimation at the user. Second, in
order to track the relative location to give a precise trace and
to adjust the deviation when the user veers off the correct path,
we develop a technique to adjust to the user’s footstep length.
For the system settings, we consider a practical scenario
consisting of a smartphone, APs, and a local server as illus-
trated in Fig. 2.
Fig. 2. Localization system architecture.
2019 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), 30 Sept. - 3 Oct. 2019, Pisa, Italy
The smartphone carried by a user collects the RSS from
detectable APs for self-localization. The APs are deployed
over a building to cover the area. Their exact positions are
known to the localization system. The local server stores
the RSS profile collected by the mobile device and the AP
maps, which provides exact AP positions as their densities
in the building. Table I summarizes the components of the
localization system. In this paper, we aim to provide a real-
time indoor localization and tracking scheme that can give
accurate location estimate and can be implemented on the
iPhone. Note that iPhone is extremely tight on how the
software and hardware work together due to the iOS, thus
cannot give a list of available APs in the area.
TABLE I
C OMPONENTS OF A MOBILE ASSISTED LOCALIZATION SYSTEM .
Component Characteristics and functions
Smartphone • Can extract information such as MAC address,
(iPhone 7) service set identifier (SSID), and RSS from APs
Has unique MAC address
•
• Sends radio frequency signal over the area
Access
• Provides network connectivity and wireless Inter-
point
net in public place through Wi-Fi
Its location is used to calculate the smartphone
•
location
• Stores and keeps track on the RSS profile
database collected by the mobile device
Local server
• Responses to the user during the online localiza-
tion phase
III. P ROPOSED L OCALIZATION S CHEME
Regarding signal observation model, we exploit the RSSI
measurements to estimate the range of the user. In particular,
the smartphone measures the received power Pr which is d m
away from a specific AP as [6]
 
d level is defined by historical mean and variance from the
Pd = P0 + 10γ log10 + Xτ [dB], (1)
d0
where P0 denotes the received power at the reference distance
d0 < d, γ ∈ [2, 6] represent the path loss exponent in indoor
environments, and Xτ ∼ N (0, τ 2 ) denotes the log-normal
shadowing random variable with zero mean and variance τ 2 .
Hence, the maximum likelihood estimate of the distance is
given by [6]
 −1/γ
ˆ Pd
d = d0 . (2)
P0
A. Profile Data
1) RSS profiling for Wi-Fi APs: Our RSS profile is also
based on several assumptions as follows. First, all APs have
the same SSID and frequently broadcast radio signals over the
building area. Second, we only exploit Wi-Fi RSS measure-
ments along the pathways. That is, in case an AP is located
inside a wall or upon the ceiling, the distance error between
the measured point and the actual point is neglected. For a
given area of N APs, we denote MAP as the RSS profile
database {(APi , Ψi ), i = 1, · · · , N }, where APi = [xi , yi ]
is the i-th AP coordinates, Ψi = [Ψi (1), · · · , Ψi (M )]T is its
corresponding RSS reading vector, and M is the number of
RSS samples.
2) iPhone inertial sensors: A modern smartphone is typi-
cally equipped with inertial measurement unit (IMU), which
measure the phone mobility. IMU is an electronic device com-
posed by an accelerometer, a gyroscope, and a magnetometer
that measure gravity, orientation, and velocity, respectively
[3]. Thus, the smartphone is also constrained by the cost, the
sizes, and the power consumption of those sensors. In order to
assist indoor navigation, the PDR localization system use the
IMU measurements to continuously perform the localization,
i.e., the current position of the user is estimated based on its
previous positions, the estimated speed and moving direction
obtained from the IMU.
In particular, we assume that the user holds the iPhone in
front of him. The phone’s screen is pointed up while its top
of edge is directed towards the moving direction of the user.
In order to construct a moving trajectory, three main functions
of the PDR involve step detection, orientation reckoning, and
stride estimation.
• Step detection: Accelerator exhibits periodically repetitive
patterns that represent the behavior of human walking. It
can provide step counting and achieve a highly accurate
value about 98%. When the user is walking, the generated
changes in the acceleration across all three axes are
recorded as XYZ acceleration data. To convert XYZ
acceleration data into the step count, it is used to find
the local maxima of its magnitude. With a predefined
threshold θ, the peak with a minimum height above θ is
considered as a step. The value of θ should be learned
from experiments to match the user’s movement behavior.
For instance, it can be obtained by applying either the
zero-crossing or the level-crossing methods, where the
lowpass filtered accelerator of the phone [17]–[19].
• Orientation reckoning: This information is obtained from
the gyroscope and the magnetometer to provide an abso-
lute direction with respect to the Earth coordinate system
and the relative direction changes with respect to the
phone platform. We employ the gyroscope to monitor
moving direction, while incorporating with the compass
in the magnetometer to support the direction of the
moving trajectory. The compass measures the angle α
(in radian) between the user and the North of the Earth.
• Stride estimation: By multiplying by user stride length,
we can convert a number of steps into a physical distance
in meter. For instance, assuming that the user’s stride
length is about 0.43 m and the number of footstep counts
is 100, the user has moved a distance about 43 m. To
obtain an accurate walking distance, the characteristics of
the stride length is necessary. A pedestrian may exhibit
2019 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), 30 Sept. - 3 Oct. 2019, Pisa, Italy
different stride lengths due to the variety of walking speed
and style.
In practice, we build a simple Xcode project to get the
information from those aforementioned sensors [15]. Since the
PDR suffers from integration drift due to the measurement
errors of the acceleration and the angular velocity sensing, the
localization performance may be degraded over a long period
of time. Also, the IMU is sensitive to smartphone placement
and human body poses, so that we need to develop a method
for step detection and stride correction.
B. Jointly location estimation and tracking
In this section, we illustrate how to collect mobile data as
well as how to monitor the walking trajectory of the user.
Different from Android smartphones, iPhone only can get the
information from one AP that it is connected to instead of a
full list of current APs. In order to obtain the SSID, the MAC
address, and the RSS profile of that AP, iPhone needs to turn
on the function “Auto connecting Wi-Fi without asking” in the
“Settings”. In this study, we consider a low density of the APs,
i.e., each AP covers a separated area with another. In case of
many APs, the strategy of the AP selection step is to select
the reliable and strongest AP from available ones to be used
for actual localization. The RSS reading between the AP and
the user is given by (1). The overall process of the proposed
work for mobility-assisted localization is described in Fig. 3.
Fig. 3. Workflow of the proposed joint location estimation.
We let the user walk for a certain duration of time,
then stop at a specific spot to collect the RSS. The iPhone
records the RSS along the user’s moving path as well as the
footstep counts. Once the MAP in Section III-A completes
the construction in the offline stage, the user in the online
phase first connects the closest AP with the strongest RSS.
Then, it requests the local server to download the MAP and
the representative RSS profile for each AP. The currently-
connected AP is chosen as the starting point for PDR tracking.
Once the initial AP APint = [xint , yinit ] is selected, we
attempt to guide the user based on the map information,
and the data from inertial sensors can be used to find the
movement trajectory of the user. Denote Pm (xm , ym ) as the
iPhone location at the m-th step, it can be estimated from the
previous location Pm−1 (xm−1 , ym−1 ) as follows.
Pm (xm , ym ) = Pm−1 + ∆P
(3)
= (xm−1 + λ0 cos α, ym−1 + λ0 sin α).
Here, λ0 is the user footstep length (typically λ0 ∈ [0.5m,
0.7m]) and α is the orientation angle. We also frequently check
if the iPhone is still within the communication range to the
current AP. In particular, denoting dm as the distance from
the current iPhone location to the current AP and dˆAPn is the
estimated range obtained from its RSS measurement (2), the
range difference or dissimilarity δm between them is defined
as
δm = |dm − dˆAP |, m ≥ 2.
n
(4)
For dm and dˆm , if their dissimilarity δm is smaller than a
predefined threshold σn (i.e., δm ≤ σn ), the calibration for
user’s stride length is not needed. Otherwise, it performs an
extra stage for step deviation correction as
δm
ǫn = , (5)
cn
λn = λ0 + ǫ n , (6)
where cn = dn /λ0 is the number of steps obtained from
the distance between the iPhone location to the currently-
connected AP and the fixed stride length λ0 from the inertial
sensors. In order to avoid accumulation of measurement errors,
we adopt the individual number of steps in a walking distance,
then employ an update for the stride estimation. This is
because even the same user may exhibit different stride length
due to various walking speed and style. The constant stride
length λ0 is only efficient when the user walks on a short
distance. For a long walking, the step counts may increase even
the moving distance of the user is still short, thus the stride
length calibration strategy is required. Finally, the current
iPhone location will be updated according to (3) with respect
to a new λn in (6), which yields to
Pm (xm , ym ) = (xm−1 + λn cos α, ym−1 + λn sin α). (7)
Such updates (5)-(7) can eliminate the errors of stride estima-
tion caused by the adverse user habit of walking, then further
mitigate localization errors during the trajectory matching of
location estimation.
2019 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), 30 Sept. - 3 Oct. 2019, Pisa, Italy

IV. E XPERIMENT R ESULTS

-30

In this section, we describe how the proposed localization -35

scheme in Section III is implemented on iPhone 7. We develop
a software application for the iPhone with Xcode. The Wi- -40

Fi scanning functionality and measurements from the inertial -45

sensors are ruled by Apple official hardware. We conduct

several experiments at COEX mall that is one of the largest
shopping malls in Korea with an area of 119,685 m2 . In this
area, there actually exist 59 Wi-Fi APs provided by an operator
named SK Telecom, but only 47 of them are working. Thus,
we only use those APs for building the RSS profiling as well
as the localization process. Most of APs are deployed at the
ceiling of the building, while a few of them are placed on two
adjacent walls. All APs have the same SSID name as “T wifi
zone-secure”. Determining where to place the APs depends on
the current planning and proper assessment of the operator. In
our experiments, we obtain exact AP locations based on a
given AP installation map.
Regarding RSS profile collection in the offline stage, we
hold the phone beneath each AP location and collect RSS
signals in two minutes. The RSSI of the AP is scanned and
stored in the RSS profile. This observation stage allows us to
see the RSS behavior of a specific AP such as RSS range and
its average value, while it helps the iPhone determines a unique
AP identifier and its signal strength. Since the RSS reading is
used to estimate the user’s location, it is important to obtain
a reliable average RSS range. Fig. 4 shows the average range
of RSS readings for all APs over the area. We observe that
the RSS ranges of two distinct APs may be different even
though the APs have the same type and the same service
provider. This phenomenon may be caused by the difference
among ceiling heights where APs are located. Larger range of
RSS results in a large error in distance estimate (2), yet yields
more false alarms, while smaller range achieves more robust
distance estimate. Moreover, for each APn we let βn be the
standard deviation of the estimated distance (2) obtained by
its RSS recording, and assign σn = βn /2 as the dissimilarity
threshold during the calibration process in in III-B. Note that
due to time varying characteristics of the Wi-Fi signals, RSS
readings collected by the iPhone may deviate from those stored
in the RSS profile. As a result, this deviation may lead to errors
in iPhone location estimation. Thus, RSS readings should be
sampled at several time intervals during the day in order to
obtain their accurate distribution over time.
In order to evaluate the localization performance of the
proposed scheme when the user is walking, Fig. 5 depicts
the real-time tracking results. In this experiment, the iPhone
7 runs with iOS 12.1.3 and join “T wifi zone-secure” Wi-Fi
network. The description of the experiment is introduced as
follows. Since we do not have a local server to store the RSS
profile, we store the MAP on the iPhone and assume that the
phone has already queried the map during the online phase. A
tester holds the iPhone with his hand and walks following a
design route called actual path, which is marked as green line
in the figures. The actual path is obtained by plotting the line
RSSI (dBm)
-50
-55
-60
-65
-70
-75
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Access point name (AP n )
Fig. 4. RSSI ranges of the APs.
between two APs, where the thickness of the line indicates
an error rate r (i.e., upper bound of localization errors). We
notice that stride lengths are vary with different persons. The
tester was 1.75 m tall and has a stride length of about λ0 = 0.6
m. He walked with speed of 3 km/h from an AP to another
AP following the actual path. We set the threshold for step
detection in Section III-A to θ = 1. The experiments were
conducted from 2 pm to 4 pm, when the mall was in working
hours and the customers were not much crowded. The iPhone
was currently-connected with AP16 , thus this AP was selected
as the initial point of the walking path. Furthermore, all the
footsteps of the tester are plotted as blue dots, and the line
connected them called the estimated path is plotted in red
color. For a given r, we first collect the number of steps Nsum
that the user finished a particular path. At each user step, we
denote the estimated position of the iPhone as Pm obtained
by (7). The distance between the point Pm and the actual path
APi −APj can be considered as the distance between Pm and
~ ij formed by two adjacent APs APi and APj . Note
the line D
that the line plotted between APi and APj is defined by the
shortest distance without any obstacles between them from the
2D location floor map. The localization accuracy is evaluated
by the following metric.
~ ij ) ≤ r}
#{Pm : d(Pm , D
F = × 100%. (8)
Nsum
A good localization scheme should achieve a high percentage
of F and its performance should be independent on the AP
density.
Fig. 5 shows the localization tracking results with different
walking route when r = 2 m. Each route represents an
irregular pattern in a walking path. For examples, in Route
1 when the user walked from AP24 to AP23 then returned to
AP24 as illustrated in the subplot of the Fig. 5(a), it creates a
sharp pattern in the route. While in Route 2 when he passed
some non-working APs (e.g., path from AP52 to AP35 ), the
2019 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), 30 Sept. - 3 Oct. 2019, Pisa, Italy
(a) Route 1: F1 = 88%
(b) Route 2: F2 = 85%
(c) Route 3: F3 = 92%
Fig. 5. Experimental results with different tracking routes.
iPhone only used the inertial measurements to localize itself.
In Route 3, the walking path contains a loop pattern in the
middle of the area. Generally, the proposed scheme can still
achieve a high level of localization performance (about 85%
or higher).
For comparison purposes, we compare our proposed scheme
(“Proposed PDRSC”) and the conventional one (“Conventional
PDR”) in terms of localization accuracy. With a certain
walking route, we calculate (8) for both schemes and make
a bar plot with categorical data as illustrated in Fig. 6.
From the figure, we observe that our scheme outperforms the
conventional PDR one, thus the localization accuracy has been
improved.
100
Proposed PDRSC
90 Conventional PDR
80
70
Accuracy (%)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 2 3
Actual path number
Fig. 6. Comparison of localization accuracy.
Fig. 7 shows the comparative plots of the cumulative distri-
bution function (CDF) of the two schemes versus localization
error upper bound. The CDF value gives the probability that
the average root mean square error (ARMSE) is smaller than a
given bound, which can refer as the estimation accuracy. This
localization error is defined as the average Euclidean distance
from the estimated location to the actual one. For example,
for a given bound error of r = 1 m, the probability that the
ARMSE is lower than r is around 0.48 in the PDR method
and about 0.65 in the proposed PDRSC one. We observe that
with the same error bound a higher reliability is guaranteed in
our proposed scheme. By employing the RSS profile from the
available APs, we can use it as an external source to improve
the accuracy of the current PDR.
V. C ONCLUSION
The main focus of this paper is to develop a simple and
robust indoor localization algorithm, especially when the AP
density is low in a large area. The conventional Wi-Fi-based
fingerprinting method takes lot of efforts to build a reliable
database, while the inertial sensors offer low cost solution
but integrate with high bias and errors. Based on the fusion
between two aforementioned methods, we constructed and
proposed an indoor localization scheme called the PDRSC
by exploiting an RSS profile for the APs and developed a
method to mitigate the impact of errors in the user strides.
Experimental results show that the localization accuracy has
2019 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), 30 Sept. - 3 Oct. 2019, Pisa, Italy

[16] A. Brajdic and R. Harle, “Walk detection and step counting on un-
1 constrained smartphones,” Proc. ACM UBICOMP 2013, pp. 225-234,
Proposed PDRSC Zurich, Switzerland, Sept. 2013.
0.9 Conventional PDR
[17] A. R. Jimenez, F. Seco, C. Prieto, and J. Guevara, “A comparison of
0.8 pedestrian dead-reckoning algorithms using a low-cost MEMS IMU,”
Proc. IEEE ISPACS 2009, pp. 37-42, Budapest, Hungary, Oct. 2009.
0.7 [18] F. Li, C. Zhao, G. Ding, J. Gong, C. Liu, and F. Zhao, “A reliable and
accurate indoor localization method using phone inertial sensors,” Proc.
0.6
ACM UBICOMP 2012, pp. 421-430, Pittsburgh, USA, Sept. 2012.
CDF

0.5 [19] F. Evennou and F. Marx, “Advanced integration of Wi-Fi and inertial
navigation systems for indoor mobile positioning,” EURASIP Jour.
0.4 Applied Signal Process., vol. 2006, no. 86706, pp. 1-11, Dec. 2006.
0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Localization error (m)

Fig. 7. Comparison of CDF performance.

been much more improved by the proposed scheme over the

conventional PDR scheme.

R EFERENCES
[1] A. Aguilar-Garcia, S.Fortes, E.Colin, and R. Barco, “Enhancing RFID
indoor localization with cellular technologies,” EURASIP Jour. Wireless
Commun. & Networking, vol. 2015, pp. 1-22, Sept. 2015.
[2] L. M. Ni, Y. Liu, Y. C. Lau, and A. P. Patil, “LANDMARC: indoor
location sensing using active RFID,” Proc. IEEE PerCom 2003, pp. 407-
415, Fort Worth, USA, Mar. 2003.
[3] C. Wu, Z. Yang, and Y. Liu, Wireless Indoor Localization: A Crowd-
sourcing Approach, Chs. 1-2, Springer, 2018.
[4] Y. Gu and F. Ren, “Energy-efficient indoor localization of smart hand-
held devices using Bluetooth,” IEEE Access, vol. 3, pp. 1450-1461, June
2015.
[5] T. D. Vy and Y. Shin, “iBeacon indoor localization using trusted-ranges
model,” Int’l Jour. Distributed Sensor Networks, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 1-13,
Jan. 2019.
[6] K. Pahlavan and A. H. Levesque, Wireless Information Networks, 2nd
Ed., Ch. 4, John Wiley & Sons, 2005.
[7] D. Xue and Y. Chen, Solving Applied Mathematical Problems with
MATLAB, Ch. 6, CRC Press, 2008.
[8] N. Mair and Q. H. Mahmoud, “A collaborative Bluetooth-based ap-
proach to localization of mobile devices,” Proc. EAI CollaborateCom
2012, pp. 363-371, Pittsburgh, USA, Oct. 2012.
[9] V. Osa, J. Matamales, J. F. Monserrat, and J. Lopez, “Localization in
wireless networks: The potential of triangulation techniques,” Wireless
Personal Commun., vol. 68, no. 4, pp 1525-1538, Feb. 2013.
[10] P. Prasithsangaree, P. Krishnamurthy, and P. Chrysanthis, “On indoor
position location with wireless LANs,” Proc. IEEE PIMRC 2002, pp.
720-724, Lisboa, Portugal, Sept. 2002.
[11] Y.-C. Cheng, Y. Chawathe, A. LaMarca, and J. Krumm, “Accuracy
characterization for metropolitan-scale wi-fi localization,” Proc. ACM
MobiSys 2005, pp. 233-245, Washington DC, USA, June 2005.
[12] Z. Chen, Q. Zhu, H. Jiang, and Y. C. Soh, “Indoor localization using
smartphone sensors and iBeacons,” Proc. IEEE ICIEA 2015, pp. 1723-
1728, Auckland, New Zealand, June 2015.
[13] S. Bak, S. Jeon, Y. Suh, C. Yu, and D. Han, “Characteristics of a large-
scale Wi-Fi radio map and their implications in indoor localization,”
Proc. IEEE IoF 2013, pp. 1-5, Pohang, Korea, Oct. 2013.
[14] D. Gusenbauer, C. Isert, and J. Krosche, “Self-contained indoor posi-
tioning on off-the-shelf mobile devices,” Proc. IEEE IPIN 2010, pp. 1-9,
Zurich, Switzerland, Sept. 2010
[15] H. Zou, Z. Chen, H. Jiang, L. Xie, and C. Spanos, “Accurate indoor
localization and tracking using mobile phone inertial sensors, Wi-Fi and
iBeacon,” Proc. IEEE INERTIAL 2017, pp. 1-4, Kauai, USA, Mar. 2017.