Evaluation of Indoor Localisation Systems: Comments on the ISO/IEC 18305 Standard

Indoor localisation systems have been studied in the literature for more than ten years and are starting to approach the market. The absence of standard evaluation methods is one of the obstacles to their adoption outside of customised environments. Specifically, the definition of benchmarking methodologies, common evaluation criteria, standardised methodologies useful to developers, testers, and end users is an open challenge. The need for common benchmarks has been tackled by some initiatives in recent years: EvAAL, EVARILOS, the Microsoft competition and the IPIN competition. The first formal attempt at defining a standard methodology to evaluate indoor localisation systems is the ISO/IEC 18305:2016 International Standard, which defines a complete framework for performing Test&Evaluation of localisation and tracking systems. This work is a first critical reading of the standard, intended to be a key contribution to the activities of the International Standards Committee of IPIN.

[1]  Claudia Linnhoff-Popien,et al.  Towards feasible Wi-Fi based indoor tracking systems using probabilistic methods , 2016, 2016 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN).

[2]  Paolo Barsocchi,et al.  Evaluating indoor localization solutions in large environments through competitive benchmarking: The EvAAL-ETRI competition , 2015, 2015 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN).

[3]  Jing Liu,et al.  Survey of Wireless Indoor Positioning Techniques and Systems , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews).

[4]  Stefano Chessa,et al.  Evaluating Ambient Assisted Living Solutions: The Localization Competition , 2013, IEEE Pervasive Computing.

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

[6]  Ingrid Moerman,et al.  The EVARILOS Benchmarking Handbook: Evaluation of RF-based Indoor Localization Solutions , 2013 .

[7]  Neal Patwari,et al.  See-Through Walls: Motion Tracking Using Variance-Based Radio Tomography Networks , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing.

[8]  Ingrid Moerman,et al.  Platform for benchmarking of RF-based indoor localization solutions , 2015, IEEE Communications Magazine.

[9]  Joaquín Huerta,et al.  A more realistic error distance calculation for indoor positioning systems accuracy evaluation , 2017, 2017 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN).

[10]  Robert Harle,et al.  A Survey of Indoor Inertial Positioning Systems for Pedestrians , 2013, IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials.

[11]  Ingrid Moerman,et al.  Platform for benchmarking RF-based indoor localization solutions: demonstration abstract , 2016, IPSN 2016.

[12]  Sebastian Tilch,et al.  Survey of optical indoor positioning systems , 2011, 2011 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation.

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

[14]  Wolfgang Mulzer,et al.  Computing the Fréchet Distance with a Retractable Leash , 2016, Discret. Comput. Geom..

[15]  Henrik Blunck,et al.  A comparative analysis of Indoor WiFi Positioning at a large building complex , 2016, 2016 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN).

[16]  Neal Patwari,et al.  RF Sensor Networks for Device-Free Localization: Measurements, Models, and Algorithms , 2010, Proceedings of the IEEE.