A Survey on TOA Based Wireless Localization and NLOS Mitigation Techniques

8/12/2019 A Survey on TOA Based Wireless Localization and NLOS Mitigation Techniques

1/18

IEEE COMMUNICATIONS SURVEYS & TUTORIALS, VOL. 11, NO. 3, THIRD QUARTER 2009 107

A Survey on TOA Based Wireless Localization andNLOS Mitigation Techniques

Ismail Guvenc, Member, IEEE, and Chia-Chin Chong, Senior Member, IEEE

Abstract Localization of a wireless device using the time-of-arrivals (TOAs) from different base stations has been studiedextensively in the literature. Numerous localization algorithmswith different accuracies, computational complexities, a-priori knowledge requirements, and different levels of robustnessagainst non-line-of-sight (NLOS) bias effects also have beenreported. However, to our best knowledge, a detailed uni edsurvey of different localization and NLOS mitigation algorithmsis not available in the literature. This paper aims to give acomprehensive review of these different TOA-based localizationalgorithms and their technical challenges, and to point outpossible future research directions. Firstly, fundamental lower

bounds and some practical estimators that achieve close tothese bounds are summarized for line-of-sight (LOS) scenarios.Then, after giving the fundamental lower bounds for NLOSsystems, different NLOS mitigation techniques are classi edand summarized. Simulation results are also provided in orderto compare the performance of various techniques. Finally, atable that summarizes the key characteristics of the investigatedtechniques is provided to conclude the paper.

Index Terms Cramer-Rao Lower Bound, Location Estima-tion, NLOS Mitigation, Positioning, Time-of-Arrival.

I. INTRODUCTION

RECENTLY, location awareness has received great deal

of interest in many wireless systems such as cellularnetworks, wireless local area networks, and wireless sensornetworks due its capability to provide wide range of add-onapplications. Location-based services such as location basedadvertisement, location based social networking, and E911emergency services have become more important in orderto enhance the future lifestyle. For example, the locationbased advertisement allows users to selectively receive promo-tional advertisement by strategically placing messaging nearwhere buyer behavior can be most immediately in uenced.For instance, a user will receive electronics sales items andcoupons only when he/she is entering a shopping mall. Onthe other hand, location based social networking may further

enhance the Internet based social networking services suchas Facebook, Friendsters, MySpace, etc. by allowing usersforming groups based on their social preference and interest.For the E911 emergency services, user will be able to makeemergency call that allows local authority to track and locatethe user position under both indoor and outdoor scenarioswith high accuracy. The aforementioned example applications

Manuscript received 9 December 2007; revised 2 June 2008.The authors are with DOCOMO Communications Laboratories USA, 3240

Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94304, USA (e-mail: [email protected], [email protected]).

Digital Object Identi er 10.1109/SURV.2009.090308.

offered by location awareness will enable ubiquitous andcontext aware network services which necessitate the locationof the wireless device to be accurately estimated.

Even though location estimation problems have been inves-tigated extensively in the literature in the last few decades,there are still some open issues that remain unresolved.One of the key challenges in localization is the ef ciencyand preciseness of the estimation in dense cluttered non-line-of-sight (NLOS) scenarios. NLOS scenarios occur whenthere is an obstruction between transmitter (TX) and receiver

(RX) which are commonly encountered in modern wirelesssystem deployment for both indoor (e.g., residential, of ce,shopping malls, etc.) and outdoor (e.g., metropolitan, urbanarea, etc.) environments. In such circumstances, the use of theglobal positioning system (GPS) becomes impractical if notimpossible.

Several previous works have been reported in the literature(e.g., [1][5]) that provide extensive review on localizationusing angle-of-arrival (AOA), time-of-arrival (TOA), time-difference-of-arrival (TDOA), and received-signal-strength(RSS) techniques. However, none of these works investigatethe impact of NLOS mitigation techniques in detail in or-der to improve the performance degradation incurred by theblockage of the direct path. In this paper, we provide acomprehensive survey for TOA based localization techniqueswhich are applicable for both LOS and NLOS scenarios. Forother techniques such as AOA, TDOA, and ngerprint-basedmethods, interested readers are referred to [6][8] and thereferences therein.

The goal of this paper are two folds. Firstly, to providea uni ed overview of different TOA based localization tech-niques and related NLOS mitigation approaches. Secondly,to study the trade-offs and inter-relations among the variouslocalization techniques. Note that speci c techniques requiredto estimate the TOA of the rst arriving path for TOA-based

ranging are outside the scope of this paper; interested readersare referred to [9][17].The paper is organized as follows. Section II brie y re-

views different location estimation techniques; namely, TOA,TDOA, AOA, RSS, and pattern-matching based approaches.In Section III, the TOA based localization scenario is outlinedand the system model as well as the problem de nitionare presented. For the rest of the sections, Section IV andSection V are dedicated to LOS scenarios while Sections VI-X are dedicated to NLOS scenarios. Section IV providesfundamental lower bounds for LOS systems and summarizessome of the key maximum likelihood (ML) based techniques

1553-877X/09/$25.00 c 2009 IEEE


2/18


3/18

GUVENC and CHONG: A SURVEY ON TOA BASED WIRELESS LOCALIZATION AND NLOS MITIGATION TECHNIQUES 109

TABLE IOVERVIEW OF D IFFERENT LOCALIZATION A LGORITHMS .

LocalizationTechnique

Summary and Characteristics Strength and Weakness Usage and Applicability

TOA Uses distance information between FT andMT.

One-way ranging requires perfect synchro-nization, while two-way ranging does not.

More common in cellular networks.

TDOA Difference between TOAs in several FTs areutilized.

Needs highly precise synchronization be-tween MTs, while not precise synchroniza-tion between FTs and MTs.

More common in wireless sensor networks.

AOA Uses the angle information to construct thelines between MT and FTs and use theirintersection to nd MT location

Requires new hardware (antenna arrays).This means additional costs and larger nodesizes.

More appropriate for FTs rather than MTsdue to large size. Otherwise MT size has tobe able to accommodate an antenna array.

RSS Distance is estimated based on the attenua-tion introduced by propagation of the signalfrom FT to MT.

An accurate propagation model is neededfor reliable distance estimation. It is lowcost due to most RX being able to estimateRSS. MT mobility and channel variationmay yield large errors.

Since it has low-precision characteristic, typ-ically used in applications which requirecoarse estimate.

PatternMatching

Fingerprint information of measured radiosignal at different geographical locations areutilized.

Needs an off-line training stage to obtain adatabase. Also, this database may be unreli-able if the channel and environment changeswith time.

Mostly used in wireless local area networkswith RSS as the metric used in the database.Also considered for cellular systems.

due to the blockage of direct path given by

bi = 0 , if ith FT is LOS ,i , if ith FT is NLOS .

(2)

For NLOS FTs, the bias term i was modeled in dif-ferent ways in the literature such as exponentially dis-tributed [18], [19], uniformly distributed [20], [21], Gaussiandistributed [22], constant along a time window [23], or basedon an empirical model from measurements [24], [25]. Typi-cally, the model depends on the wireless propagation channeland the speci c technology under consideration (e.g., cellularnetworks, wireless sensor networks, etc.).

Letd = d (x ) = [ d1 , d2 ,...,dN ]T , (3)

be a vector of actual distances between the MT and the FTs,

d = [d1 , d2 ,..., dN ]T , (4)

be a vector of measured distances, and

b = [b1 , b2 ,...,bN ]T , (5)

be a bias vector. Also let

Q = E[nn T ] = diag[21 , 22 ,...,

2N ]

T , (6)

to denote the covariance of noise vector n = [n1 , n 2 ,...,n N ]T with the assumption that all the noise terms are zero mean and

independent Gaussian random variables.In the absence of noise and NLOS bias, the true distance

di between the MT and the ith FT de nes a circle around theith FT corresponding to possible MT locations

(x x i )2 + ( y yi )2 = d2i , i = 1, 2, . . . ,N , (7)where all the circles intersect at the same point, and solvingthese expressions jointly gives the exact MT location. How-ever, the noisy measurements and NLOS bias at different FTsyield circles which do not intersect at the same point (see Fig.1), resulting in the inconsistent equations as follows

(x

x i )2 + ( y

yi )2 = d2i , i = 1, 2, . . . ,N . (8)

In order to have more compact expressions throughout thepaper, we further de ne the following terms

s = x2 + y2 , ki = x2i + y2i . (9)

The problem of TOA-based location estimation can bede ned as the estimation of the MTs location x from the noisy(and possibly biased) distance measurements in (4) given theFT locations x i ; in other words, given the set of equationsin (8). Various localization techniques were proposed in theliterature in order to estimate the MT location from (8) inLOS and NLOS scenarios. In the following sections, we willreview these algorithms and discuss their trade-offs.

IV. LOS SCENARIOS : FUNDAMENTAL LIMITS AND MLSOLUTIONS

In this section, we will overview the fundamental lowerbounds and ML type of algorithms for LOS scenarios (i.e.,bi = 0 for all i). First, we de ne below the ML algorithmthat maximizes the conditional probability of the measureddistances d . Then, the Cramer-Rao lower bound (CRLB) willbe derived in the following section. Two other sub-optimumML type of algorithms asymptotically achieving the CRLBwill also be described.

A. Maximum Likelihood Algorithm

In the absence of NLOS bias (i.e., bi = 0 for all i), theconditional probability density function (PDF) of d in (4)given x can be expressed as follows [26], [27]

P (d |x ) =N

i=1

1

2 2iexp

(di di )222i

(10)

= 1

(2)N det( Q )exp

J2

, (11)

where

J = d d (x )T

Q 1 d d (x ) , (12)


4/18

110 IEEE COMMUNICATIONS SURVEYS & TUTORIALS, VOL. 11, NO. 3, THIRD QUARTER 2009

with Q as given in (6). Then, the ML solution for x is theone that maximizes P (d |x ), i.e.,

x = arg maxx

P (d |x ) . (13)Note that solving for x from (13) requires a search overpossible MT locations which is computationally intensive.

For the special case of 2i = 2 for all i , the ML solution

in (13) is equivalent to minimizing J . In order to

nd theminimum value of J , the gradient of J with respect to x isequated to zero, yielding [26]

N

i=1

(di di )(x xi )di

= 0 , (14)

N

i=1

(di di )(y yi )di

= 0 , (15)

which are non-linear equations. Hence, x can not be solvedin closed form from (14) and (15) using a linear least squares(LS) algorithm. Also, both (14) and (15) depend on di , whichare unknown. Even though a closed form ML solution is

not possible, approximate and iterative ML techniques can bederived as will be discussed in Section IV-C and Section IV-D,which may asymptotically achieve the CRLB.

B. Cramer-Rao Lower Bounds

Given the conditional PDF of d as in (10), we may derivethe CRLB for TOA based location estimation. The CRLB, ingeneral, can be de ned as the theoretical lower bound on thevariance of any unbiased estimator of an unknown parameter.The CRLB for the TOA based location estimation mainlydepends on the following factors:

Positions of the FTs ( x i ),

True position of the MT ( x ), and Measurement noise variances (

2i ).

The CRLB is calculated using the Fisher information matrix(FIM), whose elements are de ned as

[I (x )]ij = E 2 lnP (d |x )

x i x j . (16)

Then, using the PDF given in (10), the FIM can be calculatedas [27], [28]

I (x ) =

N i=1

(xx i )2

2i d2i

N i =1

(xx i )( yy i ) 2i d 2iN i=1

(xx i )( yy i ) 2i d 2iN i =1

(yy i )2

2i d2i

,

(17)

=

N i=1

cos 2 ( i ) 2i

N i =1

cos( i )sin( i ) 2i

N i=1

cos( i )sin( i ) 2i

N i=1

sin 2 ( i ) 2i

,

(18)

where i de nes the angle from the ith FT to the MT, andthe CRLB is given by I1(x ). Thus, for an estimate x of theMT location obtained with any unbiased estimator, we have

E x (x x )( x x )T I 1(x ) . (19)The CRLB can be related to another important measurement

metric referred to as the geometric dilution of precision

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

CRLB

x (meter)

y ( m e

t e r )

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

1.1

1.2

1.3

(meter)

Fig. 2. The CRLB for a simple localization scenario where there are fourFTs at the corners of a square room of size 40 40 meters.

(GDOP) in the literature. For identical noise variances 2i =

2 at different FTs, the GDOP can be de ned as

GDOP = RMSE locRMSE range

= loc

, (20)

where RMSE loc and RMSE range are the root mean squareerror (RMSE) of the location estimate and the range estimate,respectively, and loc is the standard deviation of the locationestimate. GDOP depends highly on the positions of the FTsand the MT location. While GDOP values smaller than threeare usually preferable, values larger than six may imply a verybad geometry of the FTs. If the employed location estimatorcan achieve the CRLB, the GDOP is given by

GDOP = trace I 1(x ) , (21)= trace I 1(x ) , (22)

where

I (x ) = N i=1 cos

2( i ) N i =1 cos( i )sin( i )

N i=1 cos( i )sin( i )

N i=1 sin

2 ( i ) .

(23)

The relation between the achievable localization accuracy andthe geometry between the locations of the MT and the FTs isapparent from (22).

1) Simulation Results: The CRLBs for a simple wirelesslocalization scenario at different MT locations is illustrated inFig. 2. Four FTs are positioned at [0, 0] m, [0, 20] m, [20, 0] m,and [20, 20] m and we have 2 = 0 .5 for all the FTs. TheCRLB becomes lower when the MT is closer to the center of the room. Also, at four speci c MT locations, the FIM in (16)becomes singular and does not have a matrix inverse, whichexplains the white spots in Fig. 2.

In order to see the typical values that GDOP may takein wireless localization, some example node topologies aresimulated in Fig. 3. Three MT locations are considered,namely [5, 5] m, [25,

25] m, and [

50, 50] m. FT-1 location is


5/18


50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 5050

40

30

20

10

0

10

20

30

40

50

meters

m e t e r s

MT LocationsFT1 Location

PlacenewFTs

(25, 25)

(5,5)

( 50,50)

2 /Nmax

(a) Topology for GDOP simulations.

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

100

101

N: Number of FTs

G D O P

[5,5], T1[25, 25], T1[ 50,50], T1[5,5], T2[25, 25], T2[ 50,50], T2[5,5], T3[25, 25], T3[ 50,50], T3

(b) GDOP versus the number of FTs for different topologies T 1, T 2, andT 3.

Fig. 3. GDOPs for different topologies and MT locations.

xed to [20 2, 0] m and new FTs are added counter-clockwisearound the illustrated circle. Three topologies are considered,namely, T1, T2, and T3, and for each topology, a new FT isplaced at an increment of 2/N max , /N max , and / 2N maxradians, respectively, where N max = 10 denotes the maximumnumber of FTs. The GDOP is less than two for an MT locatedat [5, 5] m for all the topologies, and becomes better as moreFTs are deployed. For an MT located at [50, 50] m, GDOPis worst, and it may be as large as 10 for T3. The results showthat as we increase the number of FTs, it is possible to haveGDOP values smaller than 1, which implies that the standarddeviation of the location estimate becomes smaller than thestandard deviation of the distance measurements.

C. Two-Step ML Algorithm

While the CRLB gives a lower bound on the best achievableaccuracy, it may practically be dif cult to approach it inrealistic scenarios. One of the earlier TOA based techniques

in the literature that approaches the CRLB under certainconditions is introduced in [29]. It is a two-step ML algorithm,where the ML solution for the MT location estimate can beobtained as

= 12

(A T 1 1A 1 )1A T 1 1p 1 , (24)

where A 1 and p 1 are as de ned in (35), and

= [x,y,s ]T , (25) = E[ T ] = BQB , (26) = p 1 A 1 , (27)B = diag {2d1 , 2d2 ,..., 2dN } . (28)

Since the elements of B are unknown distances, an approxi-mate solution is obtained by using the measurements di insteadof actual distances di in B for obtaining an initial solution.Then, a more accurate solution is obtained using this initialsolution to re-calculate B , and few iterations are shown to besuf cient for convergence.

D. Approximate ML Algorithm

Another ML based technique that approaches to the CRLBis proposed in [26]. It was shown in Section IV-A that thesolution of the MT location using the ML method requires theknowledge of true distances di . With the assumption that 2i =2 i , [26] proposes an approximate ML (AML) solution thatachieves the CRLB in most scenarios. They use the identity

di di = d2i d2idi + di

, (29)

in solving (14) and (15) and obtain the following matrixequation [26]

2 gi x i gi yih i xi h i yi xy = gi (s + ki d2i )

h i (s + ki d2i ) ,

(30)

where s and ki are as in (9) and all the summations are from1 to N , with

gi = x xidi (di + di )

, hi = y yidi (di + di )

. (31)

Note that other than s, the weights gi and hi also dependon x in the above relations, which is (obviously) unknown.Hence, the AML technique rst obtains a rough initial estimate(e.g., using the estimator in (37)) of x to compute gi and h i .Then, (30) is solved using a LS algorithm and x is obtainedin terms of s , which results in a quadratic expression. A rootselection routine is then used to select the appropriate solutionfor x . The new solution is re-used to compute new gi and h i ,and few iterations of the algorithm can achieve results closeto the CRLB.

V. LOS SCENARIOS : LEAST -S QUARES TECHNIQUES

In this section, rst, we will review non-linear least squares(NLS) techniques for estimating the position of an MT. Then,some linearization techniques will be brie y discussed.


6/18


A. Non-Linear Least Squares

The NLS is a well known technique for the estimationof an unknown parameter when its probability distribution isnot known. It is also one of the common techniques for theestimation of an MTs location, which is given by [30]

x = arg minx

Res (x ) (32)

= arg minx

N

i=1 i di ||x x i ||

2 , (33)

where Res (x ) is the residual error corresponding to MTlocation x . Some weights i can be used to characterize thereliability of each link, which yields a weighted least squares(WLS) solution. If no reliability information is available, i = 1 for all i. Minimizing the non-linear expressionin (33) requires numerical search methods such as the steepestdescent [31] or the Gauss-Newton techniques [2], which maybe computationally costly and require good initialization inorder to avoid converging to the local minima of the lossfunction [2].

B. Matrix Representation of the Non-Linear Model

We may represent the non-linear expressions in (8) in matrixform. After some manipulation, we may write them as [32]

A 1 = 12

p 1 , (34)

where

A 1 =

x1 y1 0.5x2 y2 0.5...

...

xN yN 0.5

,

=

x

y

s

, p 1 =

k1 d21k2 d22

...

kn d2N

. (35)

with s = x2 + y2 being a part of the vector of unknownvariables. In Section V-E, we will show how it can be usedas a constraint to solve for x .

After some further mathematical manipulationof (34) and (35), we may obtain an alternative LS solution asfollows

A 2x = 12

p 2 , x = 12

(A T 2 A 2 )1A T 2 p 2 , (36)

where

A 2 = x1 x2 ... xN

y1 y2 ... yN

T

, p 2 =

s + k1 d21s + k2 d22

...

s + kn d2N

.

(37)

Note that the above LS solution obtains x in terms of s,which results in a quadratic expression. Hence, a root-selectionmethod can be employed to nd x [26]. However, due to theinconsistency of equations, (36) is inaccurate. Nevertheless,it may be used as an initial location estimate to enhance thelocalization performance of more accurate (yet more complex)algorithms as will be discussed in the later sections.

C. Linearization of NLS Solution Through Taylors Series Expansion

The non-linear function d (x ) in (3) can be linearized arounda reference point x0 using Taylor series expansion. If thehigher order terms are neglected, we have [33]

d (x ) d (x 0) + H 0(x x 0) , (38)where the Jacobian matrix of d (x ) around x0 is given by

H 0 = d 1

xd 2x . . .

d N x

d 1y

d 2y . . .

d N y

T

x = x 0

. (39)

Note that the reference point x 0 should be chosen suf cientlyclose to the true location in order for (38) to be valid. Bysubstituting (38) into (33), we have a linear system whichcan be written in a matrix form and solved using a linearLS estimator. A more accurate iterative technique may usethis LS estimate as an intermediate estimate, plug it into (38)to re-linearize the system around it, and iterate until conver-gence [31].

D. An Alternative Linear Least Squares Solution

The non-linear model discussed in previous sections con-tains the parameter s which is quadratic in x and y. In order toobtain a linear model, an alternative technique was proposedin [34] for canceling out these non-linear terms. By xingexpressions for the r th FT in (8), subtracting it from the restof the equations for i = 1 , 2,...,N (i = r ), and re-arrangingthe terms, we have the following linear model

A 3x = 12

p 3 , (40)

with

A 3 =

x1 xr y1 yrx2 xr y2 yr

.

.....

xN xr yN yr

, p 3 =

d2r d21 kr, 1d2r d22 kr, 2

.

..d2r d2N kr,N

,

(41)

where kr,i = kr ki , and r is the reference FT that is usedto obtain the linear model. Note that the non-linear terms x2and y2 in p 2 of (36) are canceled out in p 3 . From the aboveexpressions, the LS solution for x can be written as (call itLLS-1 )

x = 12

(A T 3 A 3)1 A T 3 p 3 . (42)

Note that while (8) de nes a circle around each FT, the x2 andy2 terms are canceled in (40), resulting in linear expressions


7/18


Fig. 4. The illustration of circles and lines for the non-linear and linearmodels, respectively.

that can be seen as the lines connecting the intersection points(if any) of the pairs of circles. An illustration of the geometricrepresentations of the non-linear and linear models is given inFig. 4.

In order to get more insight about the accuracy of LLS-1estimator, it is worth to analyze the perturbation in the vectorp 3 . By replacing (1) in p 3 and assuming that bias terms arezero, we have

p 3 = p(c)

3 + p(n )

3 , (43)where the constant and noisy components are given by

p (c)3 =

d2r d21 kr + k1d2r d22 kr + k2

...

d2r d2N kr + kN

, (44)

p (n )3 =

2dr n r 2d1n1 + n 2r n212dr n r 2d2n2 + n 2r n22

.

..2dr n r 2dN nN + n2r n2N

, (45)

Note that while we got rid of the quadratic s term, the numberof noisy terms in p (n )3 increased. In particular, we may claimthat the accuracy of the above algorithm will degrade as theMT moves away from rth FT due to the distance-dependentnoise terms at each link. If p (n )3 0, all the lines in Fig. 4will intersect at a single point. For theoretical derivation of the MSE for LLS-1 , the reader is referred to [35].

1) Averaging Techniques: The LLS-1 estimator for (40)utilizes the measurements di , i = 1, . . . , N , only through theterms d2r

d2i , for i = 1, . . . , N and i

= r . Therefore, the

measurement set for LLS-1 effectively becomes

di = d2r d2i , i = 1, . . . , N, i = r . (46)Note that since the effective measurements in (46) becomedifferent than the measurements in (1), as also implied byFig. 4, the corresponding CRLB will be different, which arederived in [36].

In another LLS approach proposed in [20] (call it LLS-2 ),N (N 1)/ 2 linear equations are obtained by subtractingeach individual equation from all of the other equations. Inother words, in the LLS-2 technique, the following observa-tions are employed for position estimation:

dij = d2i d2j , i, j = 1, 2, . . . , N , i < j . (47)Similar to the LLS-1 , the linear LS solution as in (42) is usedin order to obtain the position of the target node in the LLS-2 technique.

In a third LLS technique proposed in [37] (call it LLS-3 ),instead of obtaining the difference of the equations directlyas in the LLS-1 and LLS-2 approaches, the average of themeasurements is obtained rst, and this average is subtractedfrom all the equations resulting in N linear relations. Then,the linear LS solution as in (42) is obtained for the position of the target node. The observation set employed in the LLS-3technique can be expressed as

di = d2i 1N

N

j =1

d2j , i = 1, 2, . . . , N . (48)

2) Reference FT Selection: The LLS-1 solution in (40)selects an arbitrary FT as the reference FT. However, observ-ing the noisy terms in p (n )3 given in (45), all the rows of thevector p (n )3 depend on the true distance between the MT andthe reference FT. If the FT is away from the MT location, this

implies that all the elements of vector p 3 will be more noisy,degrading the localization accuracy. Hence, how the referenceFT is selected may considerably affect the estimators meansquare error (MSE). A simple method to select the referenceFT for improved location accuracy in LOS scenarios is tochoose it so that its measured distance is the smallest amongall the distance measurements. The index of the reference FTthat has the smallest measured distance is given by [38]

r = arg mini {di} , i = 1, 2, . . . , N . (49)

Then, the matrix A 3 and the vector p 3 can be obtained usingthe selected reference FT (FT-r), and we refer the resultingestimator as LLS with reference selection ( LLS-RS ). Forexample, in Fig. 1, FT-1 is used to obtain the linear modelfrom non-linear expressions since d1 is the minimum amongall the measured distances.

3) Utilizing the Covariance Matrix: While the referenceFT selection discussed above improves the location accuracy,it does not account for the correlation between the rows of thevector p (n )3 , which become correlated during the linearizationprocess. As discussed in [39], the optimum estimator inthe presence of correlated observations is given by an MLestimator. First, consider the following modi cation of therelationship in (43) for a LOS scenario

p 3 = A 3 x + p(n )3 , (50)


8/18


where x is the actual location of the MT, and hence p (c)3 =A 3 x . Then, based on (50), the MLE 2 for this linear modelcan be written as [39]

x = ( A T 3 C 1A 3)1A T 3 C 1p 3 , (51)

where C = Cov( p (n )3 ) is the covariance matrix of vector p(n )3 .

When all the FTs are in LOS, the covariance matrix of vectorp

n can be derived as

C = 4d2r 2 + 2 4 + diag 42 d21 + 2

4 ,...,

42d2i + 24 ,..., 42d2N + 2

4 , (52)

with i {1, 2,...,N }, i = r , and where diag{1 ,..., N }is adiagonal matrix obtained by placing i on the diagonal of an(N 1) (N 1) zero matrix i. Note that since di are notavailable in practice, the noisy measurements di can be usedto evaluate the covariance matrix.

4) Simulation Results: Monte-Carlo simulations are per-formed in order to compare the different LLS estimators. Asin Fig. 2, four FTs are positioned on the corners of a square

room. The simulation results in Fig. 5(a) show the 2-D MSEfor LLS-1 technique, where the FT-1 is used as a referenceFT. We observe that the MSE tends to be smaller when theMT is closer to FT-1. For the simulation results in Fig. 5(b),the MT location x is changed with 10 meter intervals within[40, 40] m both in x and y directions, yielding a 99 grid of possible MT locations. The MSE of different techniques aresimulated at each location on the grid, and then averaged overall the MT locations on the grid. The results show that theLLS-1 performs worst compared to all the other techniques.The LLS-2 and LLS-3 techniques perform slightly better thanLLS-1 , and their MSEs are identical. However, they are bothbeaten by the LLS-RS technique. The MLE performs slightly

better than that of LLS-RS and very close to the CRLB.

E. Constrained Weighted Least Squares

A constrained weighted least squares (CWLS) approachwas presented in [32] which operates on (34) to nd the MTlocation 3. More speci cally, it uses the relationship betweens and x as a constraint on the LS solution, and developsa solution based on a Lagrange multiplier. The constraintoptimization problem is formulated as [32]

cw = arg min

(A 1 p 1)T W (A 1 p 1) , (53)subject to the constraint s = x2 + y2 , i.e.,

q T + T P = 0 , (54)where A 1 , , and p 1 are as in (35), and

P =

1 0 0

0 1 0

0 0 0

, and q =

0

0

1. (55)

2Note that in order to have the MLE as in (51), the elements of p nshould be zero-mean and Gaussian distributed random variables. While thereare some non-Gaussian terms (i.e., the noise-square terms) in p n , they areassumed to be negligible, or t closely to a Gaussian distribution to obtainthe MLE.

3For a more detailed discussion on different constrained LS algorithms forAOA, RSS, TDOA, and hybrid techniques, the reader is referred to [40].

In order to determine the optimal weighting matrix W , theauthors examine the disturbance in p 1 . At high signal-to-noiseratios (SNRs), we have [32]

d2i = ( d + n i )2 d2i + 2di n i for i = 1, 2, . . . ,N , (56)

which implies a disturbance i = d2i d2i =2di n i , and can be represented in vector form as =[2d1n1 , 2d2n2 ,..., 2dN n N ]

T . The covariance matrix of the

disturbance is given by [32]

= E[ T ] = BQB , (57)

with B = diag(2 d1 , 2d2 ,..., 2dN ), and the optimal weightingmatrix becomes W = 1 . Note that it depends on theactual distances {di} between the MT and the FTs whichare unknown, and an approximate weighting matrix can beobtained using B = diag(2 d1 , 2d2 ,..., 2dN ), instead of B .

The CWLS problem in (53) and (54) can then be solved byminimizing the Lagrangian as follows [32]

L( , ) = ( A 1

p 1)T 1(A 1

p 1) + (q T + T P ) ,

(58)

where is a Lagrange multiplier. It was shown in [32] thateither a global or a local solution to (58) is given by

cw = ( A T 1 1A 1 + P )1 A T 1 1p 1 2

q , (59)

with being determined from a ve-root equation.In another related work, the authors propose a covariance

shaping LS (CSLS) technique for location estimation, whichyields good performance compared to other LS estimators atlow SNRs [41].

VI. NLOS S CENARIOS : FUNDAMENTAL LIMITS AND MLSOLUTIONS

In typical environments, especially in indoor scenarios, itmay be possible that the LOS between the MT and someof the FTs may be obstructed (i.e., bi > 0 for some i).These NLOS FTs may seriously degrade the localizationaccuracy. Simplest way of NLOS mitigation is achieved byidentifying and discarding the NLOS FTs, and estimating theMT location by using one of the LOS techniques discussed inthe previous section. However, there is always the possibilityof false-alarms (identifying a LOS FT as NLOS) and missed-detections (identifying an NLOS FT as LOS) which degradethe localization accuracy. In this section, we review alternativeNLOS mitigation techniques reported in the literature. Firstly,the ML based techniques and the CRLBs in NLOS scenarioswill be discussed.

A. ML Based Algorithms

ML approaches for NLOS mitigation were discussedin [19], [23], which require prior knowledge regarding thedistribution of NLOS bias. For example, [19] provides an MLsolution for the position of the MT with the assumption thatthe NLOS bias bi is exponentially distributed with parameter i . Since in most cases NLOS bias is much larger than


9/18


5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Linear LS Estimator MSE (Sim)

x (meter)

y ( m e

t e r )

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

(meter)

(a) 2-D MSE of the LLS-1 in a LOS scenario.

0.5 1 1.50.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

2.2

A v e r e a g e

M S E ( m

2 )

Noise variance (m 2)

LLS1LLSRSMLELLS2LLS3Original CRLB

(b) Simulation results for different linear LS estimators in LOS scenario.

Fig. 5. Comparison of the MSEs of different linear LS location estimation techniques averaged over a grid.

the Gaussian measurement error, the following simplifyingassumption was made

di = di +bi , i = 1, 2,...,N NL ,n i , i = N NL + 1 ,...,N,

(60)

where N NL is the number of NLOS FTs, and N L = N N NL denotes the number of LOS FTs. Thus, a simpli ed MLsolution is given as follows [19]

x = arg minx

N NL

i=1

i (di di ) +N

i = N NL +1

(di di )222i

.

(61)

It is also possible to obtain the exact decision rule by con-sidering the summation of Gaussian and exponential randomvariables, which has the following probability density function

P (x) = exp x 2 / 2 Q x

, (62)

where Q() = 1 2 exp(x2 / 2)dx denotes the Q-

function, and the exact ML solution becomes [19]

x = arg minx

N NL

i=1

i di di i 2i / 2

N NL

i=1 log Q i i di

di

i +

N

i= N NL +1

(di

di )2

22i .(63)

Another NLOS mitigation technique for TOA based systemsbased on the ML approach is introduced in [23]. The authorsconsider several hypothesis for different sets of FTs, and then,utilizing the ML principle, the best set (that is assumed to becomposed of LOS FTs) is selected for location estimation.The hypothesis index estimate for the best FT set is derivedas [23]

i = arg mini

ln 1(i) +k S LOSi

N trn2

2k (i)2k

, (64)

where S LOS i denotes the ith set of MTs which are hypothe-sized to be LOS, and (i) are assigned according to the a-

priori probability of each hypothesis (equivalent to 1 if noinformation available). Also,

2k (i) = 1N trn

N trn

m =1(tk,m ||x (i) x k ||)2 , (65)

denotes the estimated variance of the N trn TOA measurementstied with the kth FT under the ith hypothesis, and tk,m denotesthe m th TOA measurement at the kth FT. Note that the aboveapproach requires buffering of N trn TOA measurements forthe purpose of obtaining the noise statistics at a particular FT.Once the set of LOS FTs is selected using the ML principle,the MT location is estimated using only these FTs and theML algorithm. Simulation results in [23] show that this yieldsbetter accuracy than residual weighting (Rwgh) techniqueintroduced in [18] (to be discussed in Section VII-B), andslightly worse than when only the true LOS FTs are used inlocalization. Also, at low SNR and small NLOS bias values,simulation results imply it may be better not to employ anyNLOS mitigation in order not to degrade the accuracy.

B. Cramer-Rao Lower Bound

In NLOS scenarios, the CRLB depends on if there isany prior information available about the NLOS bias. Firstconsider that there is no prior information about the NLOSbias, except that only the NLOS FTs are assumed to beperfectly known. Then, an extended version of the FIM in (19)is given by [42]

I (x b) = AI (d )A T , (66)

where

x b = [x, y, b1 , b2 ,...bN NL ]T , (67)


10/18


is an (N NL + 2) 1 vector of unknown parameters (includingthe NLOS bias values) withA =

d x b

=

d 1x

d 2x . . .

d N NLx . . .

d N x

d 1y

d 2y . . .

d N NLy . . .

d N y

d 1b 1

d 2b 1 . . .

d N NLb 1 . . .

d N b 1

......

.. . ...

. . . ...

d 1b N NL

d 2b N NL

. . . d N NLb N NL . . . d N

b N NL

,

(68)

and

I (d ) = E d lnf (d |d )

d lnf (d |d )

d

T

. (69)

As discussed in [42], A can be written in terms of its LOSand NLOS components as

A = A NL

A LI N NL 0N NL ,N L , (70)

where IN NL and 0N NL ,N L are an identity matrix of sizeN NL N NL and a zero matrix of size N NL N L , respectively,and

A NL = cos 1 cos 2 . . . cos N NLsin 1 sin 2 . . . sin N NL

, (71)

A L = cos N NL +1 cos N NL +2 . . . cos N sin N NL +1 sin N NL +2 . . . sin N

.

(72)

Similarly, I(d ) can be written in terms of its NLOS and

LOS components as [42]

I (d ) = NL 0

0 L , (73)

where NL = diag( 21 ,...,2

N NL ) and L =diag( 2N NL +1 ,...,

2N N ). After some manipulation, I(x b)

can be obtained as [42]

I (x b) = A NL NL A T NL + A L L A T L A NL NL

NL A T NL NL .

(74)

Note that (74) depends both on NLOS and LOS signals.

However, it was further proven in [42] that the CRLB forthe MT location is given by

E (x b x b)( x b x b)T I 1 (x b) = A L L A T L 1

.(75)

In other words, the CRLB exclusively depends on theLOS signals if the NLOS FTs can be accurately identi ed.Hence, the ML estimator that can achieve the CRLB inNLOS scenarios rst identi es the NLOS FTs, discards thesemeasurements, and then obtains the location estimate usingthe LOS FTs, as illustrated in Fig. 6(a).

If there is further side information related to the statisticsof the NLOS bias vector b , a better positioning accuracy can

Fig. 6. Illustration of block diagrams for (a) ML estimator and (b) MAPestimator in NLOS scenarios. In part (a), without loss of generality, it isassumed that the rst N L measurements are the LOS measurements.

be obtained. Then, the generalized CRLB (G-CRLB) can bewritten as [42]

E (x b x b)( x b x b)T I (x b) + 0 00

1

(76)

= A NL NL A T NL + A L L A T L A NL NL

NL A T NL NL +

1,

(77)where = diag( 21 ,..., 2N NL ), and 2i can be interpretedas the variance 4 of bi . As an upper bound on the G-CRLB,when the variances 2i are in nitely large, 0, and G-CRLB is reduced to the CRLB (since there is practically noinformation available on bi ). The estimator that asymptoticallyachieves the G-CRLB is given by the maximum a-posteriori(MAP) estimator, and it employs the statistics of the NLOSbiases as illustrated in Fig. 6(b).

VII. NLOS S CENARIOS : LEAST SQUARES TECHNIQUES

The LS techniques for location estimation can be tuned to

suppress the NLOS bias effects, e.g., through some appropriateweighting. In this section, weighted least squares approachesas well as the residual weighting algorithm will be brie yreviewed.

A. Weighted Least Squares

A simple way to mitigate the effects of NLOS FTs is togive less emphasis to corresponding NLOS terms in the LSsolution. In [19], [30], with the assumption that the variancesof the distance measurements are larger for NLOS FTs, the

4For Gaussian distributed NLOS bias, it is strictly the variance of the NLOSbias.


11/18


TABLE IISTEPS OF THE RESIDUAL WEIGHTING ALGORITHM IN [18].

1) Form N cb = PN i =3 N C i range measurement combinations, where

N C i denotes the total number of combinations with i FTs selectedfrom a total of N FTs. Also let {S k |k = 1 , 2, . . . ,N cb } denote the setof FTs for the k th combination.

2) For each set of combinations S k , compute an intermediate LS locationestimate as follows

x k = arg minx nR es (x ; S k )o , (83)where R es (x ; S k ) is the residual error when only the FTs in set S kare used for calculating the MT location. Also de ne the normalizedresidual

R es (x k ; S k ) = R es ( x k ; S k )/ |S k | , (84)

where |S k | denotes the size of S k .3) Find the nal location estimate by weighting the intermediate location

estimates with their corresponding normalized residual errors:

x = PN cbk =1 x k hR es (x k ; S k )i

1

PN cbk =1 hR es ( x k ; S k )i

1 . (85)

inverses of these variances are used as a reliability metric i in (33). This is actually derived from the ML solution asfollows. For the ML algorithm, the location estimate is givenby

x ML = arg maxx p( d |x ) , (78)where

p( d |x ) = p n (d d |x ) . (79)If the noise is Gaussian distributed, we have

pn (n) = 1 2 i exp n2

22i . (80)

Then, the joint probability function becomes

p( d |x ) = 1

(2)N/ 2 N i=1 iexp

N

i=1

(di ||x x i ||)222i

.

(81)

Upon further manipulation of (81), the ML solution becomesequivalent to

x ML = arg minx

N

i=1

(di ||x x i ||)22i

, (82)

which is equivalent to the WLS solution for i = 1/ 2i .However, for a static MT, the variance of TOA mea-

surements may not be signi cantly different for LOS andNLOS FTs. Still, the bias in NLOS distance measurementsmay degrade the localization accuracy. Hence, in [43], [44]an alternative weighting technique is proposed, which usescertain statistics of the multipath components of the receivedsignals. In particular, kurtosis, mean excess delay, and root-mean-square (RMS) delay spread of the received signal areused to evaluate the likelihood value of the received signal tobe LOS. The likelihood values are then used to evaluate theweighting parameters i .

B. Residual Weighting Algorithm

The Rwgh algorithm proposed in [18] is based on theobservation that the residual error Res (x ) is typically largerif NLOS FTs are used when estimating the MT location. Byassuming that there are more than three FTs available, theRwgh estimates the MT location as detailed in Table II.

It was shown in [18] through simulations that Rwgh per-

forms better than choosing the location estimate with theminimum residual error (MRE). A sub-optimal version of Rwgh algorithm that has lower computational complexity wasproposed in [45]. In that paper, instead of considering allthe combinations of the FTs (which may be very large if N is large), rst, all the combinations with (N 1) FTsare considered in order to calculate the intermediate locationestimates and the corresponding residuals. Then, among N different combinations, the FT which is not employed in thebest estimator (i.e., corresponding to the combination withthe smallest residual error) is discarded. The process iteratesuntil a certain pre-determined stopping rule is reached (such aswhen a minimum number of FTs is reached, or, if the change

in the residual error is small).

VIII. NLOS S CENARIOS : CONSTRAINED LOCALIZATIONTECHNIQUES

In this section, a different class of NLOS mitigation al-gorithms which utilize some constraints associated with theNLOS measurements will be brie y reviewed.

A. Constrained LS Algorithm and Quadratic Programming

The two-step ML algorithm discussed in Section IV-C isnot robust to NLOS effects. In [46], a quadratic programming(QP) technique for NLOS environments is developed. Themathematical programming is formulated as follows

cw = arg min

(A 1 p 1)T 1(A 1 p 1) , (86)s.t . A 1 p 1 , (87)

where A 1 , p 1 , and are as in (35). Note that (86) and (87)constitute a constrained LS (CLS) algorithm that can besolved using quadratic programmingtechniques 5. The intuitiveexplanation of the CLS is that (86) nds a WLS solutionto the MT location, while the constraint (87) relaxes theequality (which holds in LOS scenarios) into an inequalityfor the NLOS scenarios. In [46], a further re ning stage is

also introduced to incorporate the dependency between s andx .

B. Linear Programming

In [20], [47], a linear programming approach was intro-duced which assumes perfect a-priori identi cation of LOSand NLOS FTs. As opposed to the identify&discard (IAD)type algorithms (to be discussed in Section X), it does notdiscard NLOS FTs, but uses them to construct a linear feasibleregion for the MT location. The location estimate is obtainedusing a linear programming technique that employs only the

5E.g., using the quadprog function in Matlab.


12/18


13/18


If the bias vector b is known, a more accurate bias-freelocation estimate is given by [33]

x = x + Vb , (102)

where

V = (H T 0 Q 1H 0)1H T 0 Q 1 , (103)is a bias correction matrix. However, in reality, b is unknownand has to be estimated. In order to estimate b from (100),the observed bias metric is de ned as [33]

z = y H 0 x , (104)which can be simpli ed to z = Sb + w , where S = I + H 0V ,and the bias noise is given by

w = H 0(x x ) n . (105)Then, the following constrained optimization problem is de- ned to estimate the NLOS bias errors [33]

b = arg minb

(z

Sb )T Q 1

w (z

Sb ) , (106)

s.t . bi B i , i = 1, 2, . . . ,N , (107)where B i = [li , u i ] are the a-priori information for the rangeof bi lower-bounded by li 0 and upper-bounded by u i , andQ w is the covariance matrix of w .

In order to solve the constrained optimization problemin (106) and (107), an IPO technique was used in [33]. Inparticular, (106) and (107) are modi ed as

b = arg minb

(z Sb )T Q 1w (z Sb ) , (108)s.t . gi (bi ) s i = 0, and s i > 0 , i = 1, . . . ,N , (109)

where si is a slack variable, and gi (bi ) is a barrier functionthat satis es gi (bi ) > 0 bi [li , u i ]. A generally usedsmooth second order function that satis es the requirementis gi (bi ) = ( u i bi )/ (bi li ). Then, (108) and (109) aresolved by minimizing the following Lagrangian [33]

L(b , , s ) = ( z Sb )T Q 1w (z Sb )

N

i=1

lns i T (g (b ) s ) , (110)where g(b ) and s are obtained upon stacking gi (bi ) and si ,respectively, into N 1 vectors. Note that the logarithmicbarrier function

N

i=1

lns i , (111)

ensures that si = gi (bi ) > 0 and bias error is always within[li , u i ].

The solution to (110) can be obtained by differentiat-ing (110) with respect to b , , and s, and solving themtogether to obtain b . Once an estimate of the bias vectorb is obtained, the authors employ the bias correction matrixin (103) to calculate the bias-free location using (102). Thesimulation results reported in [33] show that better accuraciescan be obtained through IPO compared to Rwgh and iterativeLS algorithms in NLOS scenarios.

IX. NLOS S CENARIOS : ROBUST ESTIMATORS FORLOCALIZATION

Robust estimators are commonly used to suppress theimpact of outliers in a given data, and different classes of robust estimators have already been used in the literaturefor NLOS mitigation purposes. In below, few of the popularrobust estimators considered for NLOS mitigation are brie y

reviewed.

A. Huber M-Estimator

The M -estimators, which are ML type of estimators, are aclass of robust estimators that have been considered for NLOSmitigation purposes. As discussed in the previous sections, theML algorithm tries to maximize a function of the form

N

i =1

f (x i ) , (112)

which is equivalent to minimizing N i=1 log f (x i ). In thepresence of outliers, ML algorithm fails to yield accurateresults. A generalized form of the ML algorithm is referredas the M -estimator, which was introduced by Huber in 1964,and aims to minimize

N

i=1(xi ) , (113)

where (.) is a convex function. For the Huber M -estimator,the (.) is de ned as [50]

( ) = 2 / 2 | | , | | 2 / 2 | | > ,

(114)

which is not strictly convex, and therefore, minimization of theobjective function yields multiple solutions which are close toeach other [50].

In [51], M -estimator was used to estimate the MT location,which yields

x = arg minx

N

i =1

di ||x x i || / i . (115)Simulation results in [51] show that M -estimator outperformsthe conventional LS estimator, especially for large NLOS biaserrors. If bootstrapping technique is used in conjunction withM -estimator, the accuracy can be improved further [51].

B. Least Median Squares

In [37], a least median squares (LMS) technique wasproposed for NLOS mitigation, which is one of the mostcommonly used robust tting algorithms. It can tolerate ashigh as 50% of outliers in the absence of noise. The locationestimate of the MT using the LMS solution is given by [37]

x = arg minx

med i di ||x x i ||2

, (116)

where medi ((i)) is the median of (i) over all possiblevalues of i. Since calculation of (116) is computationallyintensive, [37] proposes a lower-complexity implementation


14/18


15/18


suf cient number of realizations for a reliable RT, delta testprocedure is proposed, which takes two FTs rst, and thencombines them with one of the rest of the FTs to check if all three FTs are LOS. The simulation results show that theproposed technique outperforms the Rwgh [18] and CLS [46]algorithms, and can achieve the CRLB if the number of LOSFTs is larger than half of total number of FTs.

XI. IMPACT OF FT DISTRIBUTION ON THE LOCALIZATIONACCURACY

Before concluding the survey, one last important issueto be discussed relates to the impact of FT distribution 10

on the localization accuracy. Impact of the node locationson the accuracy has been analyzed in terms of achievablefundamental lower bounds in [21], [56]. In [56], the authorsconclude that, for anchor-free localization 11 , if the nodesare distributed within a rectangular region of L1 L2, theachievable accuracy improves as L1 L2 (i.e., when theregion converges to a square). Nevertheless, for large numberof nodes, the impact of the network shape on the achievable

accuracy becomes insigni cant.In [21], an iterative algorithm called RELOCATE is pro-

posed for optimally placing the reference nodes. For a xedposition of the target node, it optimally places the referencenodes so as to minimize the Cramer-Rao bound. Extension of the algorithm for multiple locations of the target node (suchas a walking path within a building) is also presented.

Practical aspects of three dimensional placement of the FTsare evaluated in [57] using well known optimal solutions. Anexample scenario for placing four FTs within a cubic room isconsidered. Placing all the FTs on a planar surface (e.g., fourdifferent corners of the rooms ceiling) yields a relatively lowhorizontal dilution of precision (HDOP) but a large verticaldilution of precision (VDOP) 12. On the other hand, if thetarget nodes are placed in an as good as possible tetrahedroncon guration, the HDOP is relatively smaller while the VDOPis signi cantly smaller compared to the planar con guration.

Optimum geometries of the FTs for different number of FTs are derived in [58]. In general, the FTs are placed on ageometry whose corners are equally distributed on a unitspherical surface. The ve solutions to this problem for N =4, 6, 8, 12, 20 correspond to a tetrahedron, octahedron, cube,icosahedron, and dodecahedron, respectively, which are alsoreferred as Platonic solids. Also, any superposition of centeredPlatonic solids yields another optimum geometry [58].

In [59], [60], the authors analyze the relation betweenthe localization probability and node distribution. First, thenodes are classi ed as L-nodes and NL-nodes. L-nodes areassumed to know their location, and NL-nodes are assumedunaware of their location (and need to localize themselves).The distributions of the L-nodes and NL-nodes in a two

10Other than the FT distribution, other nuisance parameters may also havea considerable impact on the localization accuracy. For example, the readeris referred to [55] for a detailed discussion on the effects of FT height andpath loss exponent on the achievable localization accuracies in a log-normalfading channel.

11 No node knows its own location, but only the inter-node distancemeasurements are known.

12HDOP and VDOP are expressions for GDOP in horizontal and verticaldomains, respectively.

dimensional domain S dom R2 are modeled through Poissonpoint processes L and NL , respectively. Then, [59] derivesthe probability that a randomly chosen NL-node over S domgets localized, as well as the probability of whole networkof NL-nodes being localized for a log-normal shadow fadingscenario.

The NL-node localization failure probability over a circulardomain of radius Rcir , with per-node radio coverage radiusdrad < R cir , total number of NL-nodes kNL , and total numberof nodes N is shown to be tightly bounded as follows in [60]

P F 1 (1 a)b2N 3 1 + b2(1 a)(N 3)

+ b4(1 a)2(N 1)(N 2)

2 , (121)

where a = 1 kNL /N is the fraction of the NL-nodes tototal number of nodes and b = drad /R cir . Extensions to log-normal shadowing and analysis of transition thresholds arealso provided.

XII. CONCLUSIONIn this paper, an extensive survey of different TOA based

localization and NLOS mitigation techniques is presented.While some algorithms can perform close to the CRLB, theymay require high computational complexities and availabilityof different prior information. For example in NLOS situa-tions, prior information regarding the NLOS bias may notbe available in many scenarios. In Table III, we provide abrief summary of different techniques, as well as their com-plexities and requirements. Practical and ef cient localizationtechniques in the presence of NLOS bias still requires furtherresearch. The authors believe that this survey will serve as

a valuable resource for evaluating the merits and trade-offsof the different available techniques towards developing moreef cient and practical NLOS mitigation algorithms.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors would like to thank Dr. Fujio Watanabe fromDOCOMO USA Labs and Dr. Sinan Gezici from BilkentUniversity for fruitful discussions, to Mr. Hiroshi Inamurafrom NTT DOCOMO Japan for his continuous support, andto anonymous reviewers and the editor Dr. Nelson Fonsecafor their insightful comments.

REFERENCES

[1] A. H. Sayed, A. Tarighat, and N. Khajehnouri, Network-based wirelesslocation, IEEE Signal Processing Mag. , vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 2440, July2005.

[2] F. Gustafsson and F. Gunnarsson, Mobile positioning using wirelessnetworks: Possibilites and fundamental limitations based on availablewireless network measurements, IEEE Signal Processing Mag. , vol. 22,no. 4, pp. 4153, July 2005.

[3] S. Gezici, A survey on wireless position estimation, Springer WirelessPersonal Communications , vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 263282, Feb. 2008.

[4] H. Liu, H. Darabi, P. Banerjee, and J. Liu, Survey of wireless indoorpositioning techniques and systems, IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern.C: Applications and Reviews , vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 10671080, Nov. 2007.

[5] N. Patwari, J. N. Ash, S. Kyperountas, A. O. H. III, R. L. Moses, andN. S. Correal, Locating the nodes: cooperative localization in wirelesssensor networks, IEEE Signal Processing Mag. , vol. 22, no. 4, pp.5469, Jul. 2005.


16/18


TABLE IIIOVERVIEW OF TOA B ASED LOCALIZATION A LGORITHMS IN LOS A ND NLOS S CENARIOS .

Algorithm Name References Summary Complexity, A-priori Knowledge etc.ML Type Algo-rithms (LOS)

ML Algorithm [19], [23] The x that maximizes the joint probability of thedistance measurements is taken as the locationestimate.

Requires a comprehensive search over possibleMT locations. Requires the knowledge of PDFsfor distance measurements.

Two-Step ML [29] The location estimate can be expressed in closed-form as in (24).

Requires iteration: rst, B is evaluated basedon the measured distances, an initial locationestimate is obtained, and this is used to re ne

B .Approximate ML [26] Uses the relation in (30) to obtain x in terms of s . The resulting quadratic relation is solved byemploying a root selection routine.

Needs an initial location estimate (with a simplerestimator) to evaluate (31). May also need toiteratively update

LS Algorithms(LOS)

Non-Linear LS [2] , [30],[31]

Finds the x that minimizes the residual error asin (33).

Requires a search over possible MT locations.May employ techniques such as Gauss-Newtonor Steepest Descent for faster convergence.

Linear LSthrough TaylorsSeries Expansion

[34] Employs the Jacobian matrix in (39) in order toobtain the linear model in (38). Then solves itthrough a simple linear LS estimator.

Requires an accurate initial estimate x 0 for lin-earization. May need to iterate for improvedaccuracy.

LLS-1, LLS-2,LLS-3

[34] [37][20]

Cancels out the non-linear x 2 and y2 terms in (8)by simple subtraction operations to obtain thelinear model. Then employs linear LS estimator.

LLS-1 does not appropriately selects the refer-ence FT for linearization. Averaging techniquesLLS-2 and LLS-3 have same accuracy, but maystill use undesired FTs in linearization.

LLS-RS [38] Selects the FT with smallest measured distanceas a reference for linearization in LLS-1.

May not work well in NLOS scenarios.

LLS-MLE [38] Util izes the covariance matrix of observations in

the linear model to obtain the MLE.

Requires the noise variance information, which

is assumed identical at all the FTs.ConstrainedWeighted LeastSquares

[32] Uses the constraints in (54) to solve for the WLSformulation in (53).

Need to solve for the Langrange multiplier from the 5-root expression in (59).

ML Type Algo-rithms (NLOS)

ML AlgorithmUtilizing NLOSStatistics

[19] [42] In [19], x that maximizes the joint probabilitydensity function of the observations in NLOSscenarios is selected. MAP estimator utilizing theNLOS bias statistics is introduced in [42].

The probability density function of the NLOSbias and the distance measurements are assumedknown, and requires a search over possible MTlocations.

IAD based MLAlgorithm

[23] [42] Uses the ML principle to discard the NLOS FTs.Then, only the LOS FTs are used in locationestimation.

Need to collect N trn TOA measurements at eachFT to capture the noise statistics [23]. There mayalways be a possibility of mis-identi cation of theLOS FTs.

LS Algorithms(NLOS)

Weighted LS [43], [44] Uses some appropriate weights (e.g., using thevariance of the distance measurements, or thestatistics of the multipath components) to assignless reliability to NLOS FTs.

For a static MT, variance information may not bevery different for LOS and NLOS FTs.

Residual Weight-

ing Algorithm

[18] Different possible combinations of FT locations

are considered. Then, each of the correspondinglocation estimates are weighted with the inversesof the residual errors to obtain the nal locationestimate.

Needs to solve for N cb = PN i =3 N C i location

estimates for different hypothesis before weight-ing them.

ConstrainedLocalizationTechniques(NLOS)

Constrained LSwith QP

[46] Two-step ML technique is used to obtain anestimate of the MT, with a quadratic constraintgiven as in (87).

May have high computational complexity.

Constrained LSwith LP

[20] [47] The NLOS FTs are used to obtain a feasibleregion composed of squares. Then, the LOS FTsare used to solve for the MT location via LLS-1 technique so that the solution is within thefeasible region.

Linear constraints yield a less complex (yet acoarser) solution compared to the quadratic con-straints.

GeometryConstrainedLocalization

[49] A constraint related to the intersection points of the circles is incorporated into the two-step MLalgorithm.

Slightly more complex than the two-step MLalgorithm.

Interior Point Op-

timization

[33] First estimate NLOS bias values with IPO. Then

use the NLOS bias estimates in a WLS solution(linearized using Taylors series approximation).

Bias estimation through IPO may be computa-

tionally complex.

Robust Estima-tors (NLOS)

M-estimators [51] Employs a convex function ( ) to capture theeffects of NLOS bias values in an ML-type of estimator.

Need to tune ( ) appropriately. Better alter-natives such as the S-estimators (more robust)and MM-estimators (both robust and ef cient)are available.

Least Median of Squares

[37] The locat ion that minimizes the LMS of theresidual is selected as a location estimate.

Robust up to %50 of outliers. More computa-tionally complex than the NLS.

Identify andDiscardTechniques(NLOS)

Residual Test Al-gorithm

[28] Identi es and discards the NLOS FTs. The resid-ual errors are normalized by the CRLBs, andresulting variables are checked to nd if theyare centralized or non-centralized Chi-square dis-tributed.

Computationally complex due to testing numer-ous hypothesis, Delta-test etc.


17/18


[6] L. Cong and W. Zhuang, Non-line-of-sight error mitigation in mobilelocation, in Proc. IEEE Conf. Computer Commun. (INFOCOM) , HongKong, Mar. 2004, pp. 650659.

[7] B. Li, A. Dempster, C.Rizos, and H. K. Lee, A database methodto mitigate NLOS error in mobilephone positioning, in Proc. IEEE Position, Location, and Navigation Symp. (PLANS) , San Diego, CA,Apr. 2006, pp. 173178.

[8] H. Miao, K. Yu, and M. J. Juntti, Positioning for NLOS propagation:Algorithm derivations and CramerRao bounds, IEEE Trans. Veh. Tech-nol. , vol. 56, no. 5, pp. 25682580, Sep. 2007.

[9] J.-Y. Lee and R. A. Scholtz, Ranging in a dense multipath environmentusing an UWB radio link, IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun. , vol. 20,no. 9, pp. 16771683, Dec. 2002.

[10] K. Yu and I. Oppermann, Performance of UWB position estimationbased on time-of-arrival measurements, in Proc. IEEE Conf. Ultraw-ideband Syst. Technol. (UWBST) , Kyoto, Japan, May 2004, pp. 400404.

[11] P. Cheong, A. Rabbachin, J. Montillet, K. Yu, and I. Oppermann,Synchronization, TOA and position estimation for low-complexityLDR UWB devices, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. UWB (ICU) , Zurich,Switzerland, Sep 2005, pp. 480484.

[12] A. Rabbachin, I. Oppermann, and B. Denis, ML time-of-arrival esti-mation based on low complexity UWB energy detection, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Ultrawideband (ICUWB) , Waltham, MA, Sept. 2006.

[13] D. Dardari, C.-C. Chong, and M. Z. Win, Threshold-based time-of-arrival estimators in UWB dense multipath channels, IEEE Trans.Commun. , vol. 56, no. 8, Aug. 2008.

[14] I. Guvenc, Z. Sahinoglu, and P. Orlik, TOA estimation for IR-UWBsystems with different transceiver types, IEEE Trans. Microwave The-ory Tech. (Special Issue on Ultrawideband) , vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 18761886, Apr. 2006.

[15] I. Guvenc and Z. Sahinoglu, Threshold selection for UWB TOAestimation based on kurtosis analysis, IEEE Commun. Lett. , vol. 9,no. 12, pp. 10251027, Dec. 2005.

[16] Z. Sahinoglu and I. Guvenc, Multiuser interference mitigation innoncoherent UWB ranging via nonlinear ltering, EURASIP J. WirelessCommun. and Networking , vol. 2, pp. 110, Apr. 2006.

[17] S. Gezici, Z. Tian, G. B. Giannakis, H. Kobayashi, A. F. Molisch,H. V. Poor, and Z. Sahinoglu, Localization via ultra-wideband radios:a look at positioning aspects for future sensor networks, IEEE SignalProcessing Mag. , vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 7084, July 2005.

[18] P. C. Chen, A non-line-of-sight error mitigation algorithm in locationestimation, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Wireless Commun. Networking(WCNC) , vol. 1, New Orleans, LA, Sept. 1999, pp. 316320.

[19] S. Gezici and Z. Sahinoglu, UWB geolocation techniques for IEEE802.15.4a personal area networks, MERL Technical report, Cambridge,MA, Aug. 2004.

[20] S. Venkatesh and R. M. Buehrer, A linear programming approachto NLOS error mitigation in sensor networks, in Proc. IEEE Int.Symp. Information Processing in Sensor Networks (IPSN) , Nashville,Tennessee, Apr. 2006, pp. 301308.

[21] D. B. Jourdan and N. Roy, Optimal sensor placement for agent local-ization, in Proc. IEEE Position, Location, and Navigation Symposium(PLANS) , San Diego, CA, Apr. 2006, pp. 128139.

[22] V. Dizdarevic and K. Witrisal, On impact of topology and cost functionon LSE position determination in wireless networks, in Proc. Work-shop on Positioning, Navigation, and Commun. (WPNC) , Hannover,Germany, Mar. 2006, pp. 129138.

[23] J. Riba and A. Urruela, A non-line-of-sight mitigation technique basedon ML-detection, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP) , vol. 2, Quebec, Canada, May 2004, pp.153156.

[24] B. Denis, J. B. Pierrot, and C. Abou-Rjeily, Joint distributed synchro-nization and positioning in UWB ad hoc networks using TOA, IEEE Trans. Microwave Theory Tech. , vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 18961911, Apr.2006.

[25] D. B. Jourdan, D. Dardari, and M. Z. Win, Position error bound forUWB localization in dense cluttered environments, in Proc. IEEE Int.Conf. Commun. (ICC) , vol. 8, Istanbul, Turkey, June 2006, pp. 37053710.

[26] Y. T. Chan, H. Y. C. Hang, and P. C. Ching, Exact and approximatemaximum likelihood localization algorithms, IEEE Trans. Veh. Tech-nol. , vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 1016, Jan. 2006.

[27] C. Cheng and A. Sahai, Estimation bounds for localization, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Sensor and Ad-Hoc Communications and Networks(SECON) , Santa Clara, CA, Oct. 2004, pp. 415424.

[28] Y. T. Chan, W. Y. Tsui, H. C. So, and P. C. Ching, Time of arrivalbased localization under NLOS conditions, IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. ,vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 1724, Jan. 2006.

[29] Y. T. Chan and K. C. Ho, A simple and ef cient estimator forhyperbolic location, IEEE Trans. Signal Processing , vol. 42, no. 8,pp. 19051915, Aug. 1994.

[30] J. J. Caffery and G. L. Stuber, Overview of radiolocation in CDMAcellular systems, IEEE Commun. Mag. , vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 3845, Apr.1998.

[31] , Subscriber location in CDMA cellular networks, IEEE Trans.Veh. Technol. , vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 406416, May 1998.

[32] K. W. Cheung, H. C. So, W. K. Ma, and Y. T. Chan, Least square al-gorithms for time-of-arrival-based mobile location, IEEE Trans. Signal

Processing , vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 11211128, Apr. 2004.[33] W. Kim, J. G. Lee, and G. I. Jee, The interior-point method for an

optimal treatment of bias in trilateration location, IEEE Trans. Veh.Technol. , vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 12911301, July 2006.

[34] J. J. Caffery, A new approach to the geometry of TOA location, inProc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf. (VTC) , vol. 4, Boston, MA, Sep. 2000,pp. 19431949.

[35] I. Guvenc, C. C. Chong, and F. Watanabe, Analysis of a linear least-squares localization technique in LOS and NLOS environments, inProc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf. (VTC) , Dublin, Ireland, Apr. 2007, pp.18861890.

[36] S. Gezici, I. Guvenc, and Z. Sahinoglu, On the performance of linearleast-squares estimation in wireless positioning systems, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Commun. (ICC) , Beijing, China, May 2008.

[37] Z. Li, W. Trappe, Y. Zhang, and B. Nath, Robust statistical methods forsecuring wireless localization in sensor networks, in Proc. IEEE Int.Symp. Information Processing in Sensor Networks (IPSN) , Los Angeles,CA, Apr. 2005, pp. 9198.

[38] I. Guvenc, S. Gezici, F. Watanabe, and H. Inamura, Enhancementsto linear least squares localization through reference selection andML estimation, in Proc. IEEE Wireless Commun. Networking Conf.(WCNC) , Las Vegas, NV, Apr. 2008, pp. 284289.

[39] S. M. Kay, Fundamentals of Statistical Signal Processing: EstimationTheory . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1993.

[40] K. W. Cheung, H. C. So, W.-K. Ma, and Y. T. Chan, A constrainedleast squares approach to mobile positioning: algorithms and optimality, EURASIP J. Applied Sig. Processing , vol. 2006, pp. 123, 2006.

[41] A.-C. Chang and C.-M. Chung, Covariance shaping least-squares loca-tion estimation using TOA measurements, IEICE Trans. Fundamentalsof Electron., Commun., Computer Sciences , vol. E90-A, no. 3, pp. 691693, Mar. 2007.

[42] Y. Qi, H. Kobayashi, and H. Suda, Analysis of wireless geolocation in anon-line-of-sight environment, IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 5,no. 3, pp. 672681, Mar. 2006.

[43] I. Guvenc, C. C. Chong, and F. Watanabe, NLOS identi cation andmitigation for UWB localization systems, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf.Wireless Commun. Networking (WCNC) , Hong Kong, Mar. 2007, pp.15711576.

[44] I. Guvenc, C. C. Chong, F. Watanabe, and H. Inamura, NLOS iden-ti cation and weighted least squares localization for UWB systemsusing multipath channel statistics, EURASIP J. Advances in SignalProcessing (Special Issue on Signal Processing for Location Estimationand Tracking in Wireless Environments) , vol. 2008, no. 1, pp. 114, Jan.2008.

[45] X. Li, An iterative NLOS mitigation algorithm for location estimationin sensor networks, in Proc. IST Mobile and Wireless Commun. Summit ,Myconos, Greece, June 2006.

[46] X. Wang, Z. Wang, and B. O. Dea, A TOA based location algorithmreducing the errors due to non-line-of-sight (NLOS) propagation, IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. , vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 112116, Jan. 2003.

[47] S. Venkatesh and R. M. Buehrer, NLOS mitigation using linearprogramming in ultrawideband location-aware networks, IEEE Trans.Veh. Technol. , vol. 56, no. 5, pp. 31823198, Sep. 2007.

[48] E. G. Larsson, Cramer-Rao bound analysis of distributed positioningin sensor networks, IEEE Signal Processing Lett. , vol. 11, no. 3, pp.334337, Mar. 2004.

[49] C. L. Chen and K. T. Feng, An ef cient geometry-constrained locationestimation algorithm for NLOS environments, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf.Wireless Networks, Commun., Mobile Computing , Hawaii, USA, June2005, pp. 244249.

[50] P. Petrus, Robust Huber adaptive lter, IEEE Trans. Signal Processing ,vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 11291133, Apr. 1999.

[51] G. L. Sun and W. Guo, Bootstrapping M-estimators for reducing errorsdue to non-line-of-sight (nlos) propagation, IEEE Commun. Lett. , vol. 8,no. 8, pp. 509510, Aug. 2004.

[52] R. Casas, A. Marco, J. J. Guerrero, and J. Falco, Robust estimatorfor non-line-of-sight error mitigation in indoor localization, Eurasip J. Applied Sig. Processing , vol. 2006, no. 1, pp. 18, Jan. 2006.


18/18


[53] B. D. Ripley, Robust statistics, 2004. [Online]. Available: http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/pub/StatMeth/

[54] J. Taylor, Robust modelling using the t-distribution, in Proc. Aus-tralasian Genstat Conf. , Busselton, Australia, Dec. 2002.

[55] R. A. Malaney, Nuisance parameters and location accuracy in log-normal fading models, IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 6, no. 3,pp. 937947, Mar. 2007.

[56] C. Chang and A. Sahai, Cramer-rao-type bounds for localization, EURASIP J. Applied Sig. Processing , vol. 2006, pp. 113, 2006.

[57] J. Schroeder, S. Galler, K. Kyamakya, and K. Jobmann, Practical

considerations for optimal three dimensional localization, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Multisensor Fusion and Integration for Intelligent Syst. (MFI) ,Heidelberg, Germany, Sep. 2006, pp. 439443.

[58] B. Yang and J. Scheuing, Cramer-Rao bound and optimum sensorarray for source localization from time differences of arrival, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Acoust., Speech, Sig. Processing (ICASSP) , vol. 4,Philadelphia, PN, Mar. 2005, pp. 961964.

[59] F. Daneshgaran, M. Laddomada, and M. Mondin, The problem of localization in networks of randomly deployed nodes: Asymptoticand nite analysis, and thresholds, submitted to IEEE Trans. Inform.Theory , Oct. 2007, available on ArXiv.org arXiv:0710.0531.

[60] , Connection between system parameters and localization proba-bility in network of randomly distributed nodes, IEEE Trans. WirelessCommun. , vol. 6, no. 12, pp. 43834389, Dec. 2007.

Ismail Guvenc received the B.S. degree in electricaland electronics engineering from Bilkent University,Turkey, in 2001, the M.S. degree in electrical andcomputer engineering from University of New Mex-ico in 2002, and the Ph.D. degree in electrical en-gineering from University of South Florida in 2006.He was with Mitsubishi Electric Research Labs be-tween January and August, 2005, where he workedon UWB ranging and positioning. Since June 2006,he has been with the DOCOMO USA Communi-

cations Laboratories, Palo Alto, CA. His researchinterests are related to UWB communications, UWB ranging/localization, andnext generation wireless systems. He has published more than 30 internationalconference and journal papers, several standardization contributions, and abook chapter. He has several pending US patent applications and has co-authored a book on UWB ranging and localization. He is a member of theIEEE.

Chia-Chin Chong received the B.Eng (Hons) andPh.D. degrees from The University of Manchester,Manchester, UK and The University of Edinburgh,Edinburgh, UK, in 2000 and 2003, respectively,and currently a senior researcher at the DOCOMOUSA Labs. Her research interests include channel

measurements and modeling, UWB systems, rang-ing and positioning techniques, 4G cellular systems,and relaying and cooperative communications. Shehas published more than 80 international journals,conference papers, and standard contributions. Dr.

Chong has received numerous awards including the IEEE InternationalConference on Ultra-Wideband Best Paper Award, DOCOMO USA LabsPresident Award and The Outstanding Young Malaysian Award, all in 2006,and URSI Young Scientist Award in 2008. She currently serves as an Editorfor the IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications and has served onthe Technical Program Committee (TPC) of various international conferencesincluding the TPC Co-Chair for the Wireless Communications Symposium of the IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC) 2008. She isalso the Chair for the DG-EVAL Channel Model standardization group withinthe ITU-R WP5D for IMT systems. She is a senior member of the IEEE.

Documents

A Survey on TOA Based Wireless Localization and NLOS Mitigation Techniques