Visual positioning systems — An extension to MoVIPS

Due to the increasing popularity of location-based services, the need for reliable and cost-effective indoor positioning methods is rising. As an alternative to radio-based localization methods, in 2011, we introduced MoVIPS (Mobile Visual Indoor Positioning System), which is based on the idea to extract visual feature points from a query image and compare them to those of previously collected geo-referenced images. The general feasibility of positioning by SURF points on a conventional smartphone was already shown in our previous work. However, the system still faced several shortcomings concerning real-world usage such as request times being too high and distance estimation being unreliable because of the employed estimation method not being rotation invariant. In this paper, three extensions are presented that improve the practical applicability of MoVIPS. To speed up request times, both a dead reckoning approach (based on step counting using the accelerometer) and an orientation estimation (based on the smartphones compass) are introduced to filter relevant images from the database and thus to reduce the amount of images to compare the query image to. Furthermore, the vectors of the SURF points are quantized. For this purpose, clusters are calculated from all SURF points from the database. As a result, each image can be represented by a histogram of cluster frequencies, which can be compared with each other a lot more efficiently. The third extension is an improvement of the distance estimation method, which uses the matched feature points of an image to perform a perspective transformation and to determine the actual position with the aid of the transformation matrix.

[1]  Pierre Vandergheynst,et al.  FREAK: Fast Retina Keypoint , 2012, 2012 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[2]  J. MacQueen.  Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations , 1967 .

[3]  Anas Al-Nuaimi,et al.  Mobile Visual Location Recognition , 2013 .

[4]  Krystian Mikolajczyk,et al.  Evaluation of local detectors and descriptors for fast feature matching , 2012, Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR2012).

[5]  Ales Leonardis,et al.  High-Dimensional Feature Matching: Employing the Concept of Meaningful Nearest Neighbors , 2007, 2007 IEEE 11th International Conference on Computer Vision.

[6]  Andrew Zisserman,et al.  Automated Scene Matching in Movies , 2002, CIVR.

[7]  Andrew Zisserman,et al.  Near Duplicate Image Detection: min-Hash and tf-idf Weighting , 2008, BMVC.

[8]  Luc Van Gool,et al.  Speeded-Up Robust Features (SURF) , 2008, Comput. Vis. Image Underst..

[9]  Takeo Kanade,et al.  Image matching in large scale indoor environment , 2009, 2009 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops.

[10]  Gary R. Bradski,et al.  ORB: An efficient alternative to SIFT or SURF , 2011, 2011 International Conference on Computer Vision.

[11]  C. Schmid,et al.  Indexing based on scale invariant interest points , 2001, Proceedings Eighth IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision. ICCV 2001.

[12]  Vincent Lepetit,et al.  BRIEF: Binary Robust Independent Elementary Features , 2010, ECCV.

[13]  Corina Kim Schindhelm,et al.  Evaluating SLAM Approaches for Microsoft Kinect , 2012, ICWMC 2012.

[14]  Bernd Girod,et al.  Comparison of local feature descriptors for mobile visual search , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing.

[15]  Cordelia Schmid,et al.  A Performance Evaluation of Local Descriptors , 2005, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[16]  Roland Siegwart,et al.  BRISK: Binary Robust invariant scalable keypoints , 2011, 2011 International Conference on Computer Vision.

[17]  Andrew Zisserman,et al.  Video Google: a text retrieval approach to object matching in videos , 2003, Proceedings Ninth IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision.

[18]  David Nistér,et al.  Scalable Recognition with a Vocabulary Tree , 2006, 2006 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR'06).

[19]  Luc Van Gool,et al.  SURF: Speeded Up Robust Features , 2006, ECCV.

[20]  Gary R. Bradski,et al.  Learning OpenCV - computer vision with the OpenCV library: software that sees , 2008 .

[21]  Klaus Wehrle,et al.  FootPath: Accurate map-based indoor navigation using smartphones , 2011, 2011 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation.

[22]  Adam Baumberg,et al.  Reliable feature matching across widely separated views , 2000, Proceedings IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. CVPR 2000 (Cat. No.PR00662).

[23]  David G. Lowe,et al.  Object recognition from local scale-invariant features , 1999, Proceedings of the Seventh IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision.

[24]  Panu Turcot,et al.  Better matching with fewer features: The selection of useful features in large database recognition problems , 2009, 2009 IEEE 12th International Conference on Computer Vision Workshops, ICCV Workshops.

[25]  Chadly Marouane,et al.  Indoor positioning using smartphone camera , 2011, 2011 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation.

[26]  Paolo Pirjanian,et al.  The vSLAM Algorithm for Robust Localization and Mapping , 2005, Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.