Wireless Networks

, Volume 21, Issue 5, pp 1485–1497 | Cite as

Self-mapping radio maps for location fingerprinting

  • Gareth Ayres
  • Jason Jones


Localisation of a mobile device in Wi-Fi based indoor environments has received much attention and is an important area of research, considering the uptake of devices with built-in Wi-Fi and often blanket coverage in enterprise. Most localisation techniques in this area require an off-line calibration phase where a radio map is manually built using the laborious efforts of administrators. This radio map is then subject to becoming inaccurate with time and requires refreshing as the equipment is upgraded and replaced. We propose a system that can automatically build and calibrate a radio map for use with location fingerprinting techniques to provide indoor and outdoor localisation with Wi-Fi. This system first uses a self-mapping technique that makes use of user roaming patterns to build a weighted undirected graph of Access Point locations. We then combine this initial map with a map built by users of smartphones with built-in Wi-Fi and GPS to generate anchor nodes. We show that the unique combination of these two techniques provides a zero-configuration calibration map for use with location fingerprinting techniques, which not only saves time and effort in the calibration phase, but provides a constantly fine-tuning and self-healing map.


Wireless Localization Visualization Graph theory Force-directed layout 


  1. 1.
    Woody, C., Acker, L. et al. (2001). The impact of the FCC’s position on wireless E911.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Want, R., et al. (1992). The active badge location system. ACM Transaction on Information Systems, 10, 91–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Harter, A., et al. (1999). The anatomy of a context-aware application (MobiCom 1999) (pp. 59–68). New York, USA: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Priyantha, N. B., Chakraborty, A., & Balakrishnan, H. (2000). The Cricket location-support system. In Proceedings of the 6th annual international conference on Mobile computing and networking (MobiCom '00) (pp. 32–43). New York, USA: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/345910.345917.
  5. 5.
    Hightower, J., & Borriello, G. (2001). A survey and taxonomy of location systems for ubiquitous computing. IEEE Computer 8(34), 57–66.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bahl, P., & Padmanabhan, V. N. (2000). RADAR: An in-building RF-based user location and tracking system. INFOCOM 2000. Nineteenth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies. Proceedings. IEEE (Vol. 2, pp. 775–784).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bhasker, E. S., Brown, S. W., & Griswold, W. G. (2004). Employing user feedback for fast, accurate, low-maintenance geolocationing. In In Proc. PerCom (pp. 111–120).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    John Krumm, J. C. P. (2003). Minimizing calibration effort for an indoor 802.11 device location measurement system. Microsoft Research, MSR-TR-2003-82.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Perttula, A., et al. (2009). WLAN positioning on mobile phone. In Proceedings of 13th IAIN World Congress, Stockholm, Sweden. October 27–30, 2009.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bolliger, P., et al. (2009). Improving location fingerprinting through motion detection and asynchronous interval labeling. In Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Location and Context Awareness (pp. 37–51). Tokyo: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Taheri, A., Singh, A., & Emmanuel, A. (2004). Location fingerprinting on infrastructure 802.11 wireless local area networks (WLANs) using Locus. In Local Computer Networks, 2004. 29th Annual IEEE International Conference on (pp. 676–683).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Castro, P., et al. (2001). A probabilistic room location service for wireless networked environments. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing. Atlanta, GA: Springer.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Youssef, M. A., Agrawala, A., & Udaya Shankar, A. (2003). WLAN location determination via clustering and probability distributions. In Pervasive Computing and Communications, 2003 (PerCom 2003). Proceedings of the First IEEE International Conference on (pp. 143–150).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bolliger, P. (2008). Redpin—adaptive, zero-configuration indoor localization through user collaboration. In Proceedings of the First ACM International Workshop on Mobile Entity Localization and Tracking in GPS-Less Environments (pp. 55–60). San Francisco, CA: ACM.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chai, X., & Yang, Q. (2005). Reducing the calibration effort for location estimation using unlabeled samples. In Proceedings of the Third IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications (pp. 95–104). IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hua-Yan, W., et al. (2010). Indoor localization in multi-floor environments with reduced effort. In Pervasive Computing and Communications (PerCom), 2010 IEEE International Conference on (pp. 244–252).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lim, H., et al. (2006). Zero-configuration, robust indoor localization: theory and experimentation. In INFOCOM 2006. 25th IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications. Proceedings (pp. 1–12).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ayres, G., & Mehmood, R. (2010). LocPriS: A security and privacy preserving location based services development framework. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Knowledge-Based and Intelligent Information and Engineering Systems: Part IV (pp. 566–575). Cardiff: Springer.Google Scholar
  19. 19.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of EngineeringSwansea UniversitySwanseaUK

Personalised recommendations