Off-Site Indoor Localization Competitions Based on Measured Data in a Warehouse †

The performance of indoor localization methods is highly dependent on the situations in which they are used. Various competitions on indoor localization have been held for fairly comparing the existing indoor localization methods in shared and controlled testing environments. However, it is difficult to evaluate the practical performance in industrial scenarios through the existing competitions. This paper introduces two indoor localization competitions, which are named the “PDR Challenge in Warehouse Picking 2017” and “xDR Challenge for Warehouse Operations 2018” for tracking workers and vehicles in a warehouse scenario. For the PDR Challenge in Warehouse Picking 2017, we conducted a unique competition based on the data measured during the actual picking operation in an actual warehouse. We term the dead-reckoning of a vehicle as vehicle dead-reckoning (VDR), and the term “xDR” is derived from pedestrian dead-reckoning (PDR) plus VDR. As a sequel competition of the PDR Challenge in Warehouse Picking 2017, the xDR Challenge for Warehouse Operations 2018 was conducted as the world’s first competition that deals with tracking forklifts by VDR with smartphones. In the paper, first, we briefly summarize the existing competitions, and clarify the characteristics of our competitions by comparing them with other competitions. Our competitions have the unique capability of evaluating the practical performance in a warehouse by using the actual measured data as the test data and applying multi-faceted evaluation metrics. As a result, we successfully organize the competitions due to the many participants from many countries. As a conclusion of the paper, we summarize the findings of the competitions.

[1]  Takeshi Kurata,et al.  Review of PDR Challenge in Warehouse Picking and Advancing to xDR Challenge , 2018, 2018 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN).

[2]  Katsuhiko Kaji,et al.  UbiComp/ISWC 2015 PDR challenge corpus , 2016, UbiComp Adjunct.

[3]  Paolo Barsocchi,et al.  Comparing the Performance of Indoor Localization Systems through the EvAAL Framework , 2017, Sensors.

[4]  Vlado Handziski,et al.  PerfLoc (Part 1): An extensive data repository for development of smartphone indoor localization apps , 2016, 2016 IEEE 27th Annual International Symposium on Personal, Indoor, and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC).

[5]  Shih-Hau Fang,et al.  Off-Line Evaluation of Mobile-Centric Indoor Positioning Systems: The Experiences from the 2017 IPIN Competition , 2018, Sensors.

[6]  Fernando Seco Granja,et al.  The Smartphone-Based Offline Indoor Location Competition at IPIN 2016: Analysis and Future Work , 2017, Sensors.

[7]  Takeshi Kurata,et al.  Personal positioning based on walking locomotion analysis with self-contained sensors and a wearable camera , 2003, The Second IEEE and ACM International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality, 2003. Proceedings..

[8]  Jie Liu,et al.  The Microsoft Indoor Localization Competition: Experiences and Lessons Learned , 2015, IEEE Signal Processing Magazine.

[9]  Nobuo Kawaguchi,et al.  Indoor positioning method integrating pedestrian Dead Reckoning with magnetic field and WiFi fingerprints , 2015, 2015 Eighth International Conference on Mobile Computing and Ubiquitous Networking (ICMU).

[10]  Nader Moayeri,et al.  PerfLoc (Part 2): Performance Evaluation of the Smartphone Indoor Localization Apps , 2018, 2018 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN).

[11]  Chao Li,et al.  A smartphone-based indoor positioning system using fuzzy theory and WLAN mapping algorithm , 2015, 2015 IEEE 26th Annual International Symposium on Personal, Indoor, and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC).

[12]  Nobuo Kawaguchi,et al.  PIEM: Path Independent Evaluation Metric for Relative Localization , 2016, 2016 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN).