I'm trying to estimate a position based on signal strength received from 4 Wi-Fi Access Points. I measure the signal strength from 4 access points located in each corner of a square room with 100 square meters (10x10). I recorded the signal strengths in a known position (x, y) = (9.5, 1.5) using an Android phone. Now I want to check how accurate can a multilateration method be under the circumstances.
Using MATLAB, I applied a formula to calculate distance using the signal strength. The following MATLAB function shows the application of the formula:
function [ d_vect ] = distance( RSS )
% Calculate distance from signal strength
result = (27.55 - (20 * log10(2400)) + abs(RSS)) / 20;
d_vect = power(10, result);
end
The input RSS is a vector with the four signal strengths measured in the test point (x,y) = (9.5, 1.5). The RSS vector looks like this:
RSS =
-57.6000
-60.4000
-44.7000
-54.4000
and the resultant vector with all the estimated distances to each access points looks like this:
d_vect =
7.5386
10.4061
1.7072
5.2154
Now I want to estimate my position based on these distances and the access points position in order to find the error between the estimated position and the known position (9.5, 1.5). I want to find the intersection area (In order to estimate a position) between four circles where each access point is the center of one of the circles and the distance is the radius of the circle.
I want to find the grey area as shown in this image :
http://www.biologycorner.com/resources/venn4.gif
If you want an alternative way of estimating the location without estimating the intersection of circles you can use trilateration. It is a common technique in navigation (e.g. GPS) to estimate a position given a set of distance measurements.
Also, if you wanted the area because you also need an estimate of the uncertainty of the position I would recommend solving the trilateration problem using least squares which will easily give you an estimate of the parameters involved and an error propagation to yield an uncertainty of the location.
I found an answear that solved perfectly the question. It is explained in detail in this link:
https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/40660/trilateration-algorithm-for-n-amount-of-points
I also developed some MATLAB code for the problem. Here it goes:
Estimate distances from the Access Points:
function [ d_vect ] = distance( RSS )
result = (27.55 - (20 * log10(2400)) + abs(RSS)) / 20;
d_vect = power(10, result);
end
The trilateration function:
function [] = trilat( X, d, real1, real2 )
cla
circles(X(1), X(5), d(1), 'edgecolor', [0 0 0],'facecolor', 'none','linewidth',4); %AP1 - black
circles(X(2), X(6), d(2), 'edgecolor', [0 1 0],'facecolor', 'none','linewidth',4); %AP2 - green
circles(X(3), X(7), d(3), 'edgecolor', [0 1 1],'facecolor', 'none','linewidth',4); %AP3 - cyan
circles(X(4), X(8), d(4), 'edgecolor', [1 1 0],'facecolor', 'none','linewidth',4); %AP4 - yellow
axis([0 10 0 10])
hold on
tbl = table(X, d);
d = d.^2;
weights = d.^(-1);
weights = transpose(weights);
beta0 = [5, 5];
modelfun = #(b,X)(abs(b(1)-X(:,1)).^2+abs(b(2)-X(:,2)).^2).^(1/2);
mdl = fitnlm(tbl,modelfun,beta0, 'Weights', weights);
b = mdl.Coefficients{1:2,{'Estimate'}}
scatter(b(1), b(2), 70, [0 0 1], 'filled')
scatter(real1, real2, 70, [1 0 0], 'filled')
hold off
end
Where,
X: matrix with APs coordinates
d: distance estimation vector
real1: real position x
real2: real position y
If you have three sets of measurements with (x,y) coordinates of location and corresponding signal strength. such as:
m1 = (x1,y1,s1)
m2 = (x2,y2,s2)
m3 = (x3,y3,s3)
Then you can calculate distances between each of the point locations:
d12 = Sqrt((x1 - x2)^2 + (y1 - y2)^2)
d13 = Sqrt((x1 - x3)^2 + (y1 - y3)^2)
d23 = Sqrt((x2 - x3)^2 + (y2 - y3)^2)
Now consider that each signal strength measurement signifies an emitter for that signal, that comes from a location somewhere at a distance. That distance would be a radius from the location where the signal strength was measured, because one would not know at this point the direction from where the signal came from. Also, the weaker the signal... the larger the radius. In other words, the signal strength measurement would be inversely proportional to the radius. The smaller the signal strength the larger the radius, and vice versa. So, calculate the proportional, although not yet accurate, radius's of our three points:
r1 = 1/s1
r2 = 1/s2
r3 = 1/s3
So now, at each point pair, set apart by their distance we can calculate a constant (C) where the radius's from each location will just touch one another. For example, for the point pair 1 & 2:
Ca * r1 + Ca * r2 = d12
... solving for the constant Ca:
Ca = d12 / (r1 + r2)
... and we can do this for the other two pairs, as well.
Cb = d13 / (r1 + r3)
Cc = d23 / (r2 + r3)
All right... select the largest C constant, either Ca, Cb, or Cc. Then, use the parametric equation for a circle to find where the coordinates meet. I will explain.
The parametric equation for a circle is:
x = radius * Cos(theta)
y = radius * Sin(theta)
If Ca was the largest constant found, then you would compare points 1 & 2, such as:
Ca * r1 * Cos(theta1) == Ca * r2 * Cos(theta2) &&
Ca * r1 * Sin(theta1) == Ca * r2 * Sin(theta2)
... iterating theta1 and theta2 from 0 to 360 degrees, for both circles. You might write code like:
for theta1 in 0 ..< 360 {
for theta2 in 0 ..< 360 {
if( abs(Ca*r1*cos(theta1) - Ca*r2*cos(theta2)) < 0.01 && abs(Ca*r1*sin(theta1) - Ca*r2*sin(theta2)) < 0.01 ) {
print("point is: (", Ca*r1*cos(theta1), Ca*r1*sin(theta1),")")
}
}
}
Depending on what your tolerance was for a match, you wouldn't have to do too many iterations around the circumferences of each signal radius to determine an estimate for the location of the signal source.
So basically you need to intersect 4 circles. There can be many approaches to it, and there are two that will generate the exact intersection area.
First approach is to start with one circle, intersect it with the second circle, then intersect the resulting area with the third circle and so on. that is, on each step you know current intersection area, and you intersect it with a new circle. The intersection area will always be a region bounded by circle arcs, so to intersect it with a new circle you walk along the boundary of the area and check whether each bounding arc intersects with a new circle. If it does, then you leave only the part of the arc that lies inside a new circle, remember that you should continue with an arc from a new circle, and continue traversing the boundary until you find the next intersection.
Another approach that seems to result in a worse time complexity, but in your case of 4 circles this will not be important, is to find all the intersection points of two circles and choose only those points that are of interest for you, that is which lie inside all other circles. These points will be the corners of your area, and then it is rather easy to reconstruct the area. After googling a bit, I have even found a live demo of this approach.
Related
We have these logarithmic spirals which are circling around the centre of the coordinate system:
x = ebθ cos(θ)
y = ebθ sin(θ)
where the ebθ is the distance between the point (which is on the spiral) and the centre; and the θ is the angle between the line connecting the point and the origin and the axis x.
Consider a spiral where the angle is θ ϵ <0,10π> and the parameter is b=0.1. By thickening points on the spirals (and the angle θ) calculate the circumference with the relative precision better than 1%. Draw the spiral!
I'm preparing for a (MATLAB) test and I'm stuck with this exercise. Please help, any hint is appreciated.
Start by computing a list of x,y for your range of theta and value of b. For more accurate results, have your theta increment in smaller steps (I chose 5000 arbitrarily). Then, its simply computing the distance for each pair of consecutive points and summing them up.
t = linspace(0,10*pi,5000);
b = 0.1;
x = exp(b*t).*cos(t);
y = exp(b*t).*sin(t);
result = sum(sqrt((x(2:end) - x(1:end-1)).^2 + (y(2:end)-y(1:end-1)).^2))
I am in need of an idea! I want to model the vascular network on the eye in 3D. I have made statistics on the branching behaviour in relation to vessel diameter, length etc. What I am stuck at right now is the visualization:
The eye is approximated as a sphere E with center in origo C = [0, 0, 0] and a radius r.
What I want to achieve is that based on the following input parameters, it should be able to draw a segment on the surface/perimeter of E:
Input:
Cartesian position of previous segment ending: P_0 = [x_0, y_0, z_0]
Segment length: L
Segment diameter: d
Desired angle relative to the previous segment: a (1)
Output:
Cartesian position of resulting segment ending: P_1 = [x_1, y_1, z_1]
What I do now, is the following:
From P_0, generate a sphere with radius L, representing all the points we could possibly draw to with the correct length. This set is called pool.
Limit pool to only include points with a distance to C between r*0.95 and r, so only the points around the perimeter of the eye are included.
Select only the point that would generate a relative angle (2) closest to the desired angle a.
The problem is, that whatever angle a I desire, is actually not what is measured by the dot product. Say I want an angle at 0 (i.e. that the new segment is following the same direction as the previous`, what I actually get is an angle around 30 degrees because of the curvature of the sphere. I guess what I want is more the 2D angle when looking from an angle orthogonal from the sphere to the branching point. Please take a look at the screenshots below for a visualization.
Any ideas?
(1) The reason for this is, that the child node with the greatest diameter is usually follows the path of the previous segment, whereas smaller child nodes tend to angle differently.
(2) Calculated by acos(dot(v1/norm(v1), v2/norm(v2)))
Screenshots explaining the problem:
Yellow line: previous segment
Red line: "new" segment to one of the points (not neccesarily the correct one)
Blue x'es: Pool (text=angle in radians)
I will restate the problem with my own notation:
Given two points P and Q on the surface of a sphere centered at C with radius r, find a new point T such that the angle of the turn from PQ to QT is A and the length of QT is L.
Because the segments are small in relation to the sphere, we will use a locally-planar approximation of the sphere at the pivot point Q. (If this isn't an okay assumption, you need to be more explicit in your question.)
You can then compute T as follows.
// First compute an aligned orthonormal basis {U,V,W}.
// - {U,V} should be a basis for the plane tangent at Q.
// - W should be normal to the plane tangent at Q.
// - U should be in the direction PQ in the plane tangent at Q
W = normalize(Q - C)
U = normalize(Q - P)
U = normalize(U - W * dotprod(W, U))
V = normalize(crossprod(W, U))
// Next compute the next point S in the plane tangent at Q.
// In a regular plane, the parametric equation of a unit circle
// centered at the origin is:
// f(A) = (cos A, sin A) = (1,0) cos A + (0,1) sin A
// We just do the same thing, but with the {U,V} basis instead
// of the standard basis {(1,0),(0,1)}.
S = Q + L * (U cos A + V sin A)
// Finally project S onto the sphere, obtaining the segment QT.
T = C + r * normalize(S - C)
I want to estimate distance (camera to a point in the ground : that means Yw=0) from a given pixel coordinate of that point . For that I used camera calibration methods
But the results are not meaningful.
I have following details to calibration
-focal length x and y , principal point x and y, effective pixel size in meters , yaw and pitch angles and camera heights etc.
-I have entered focal length ,principal points and translation vector in terms of pixels for calculation
-I have multiplied image point with camera_matrix and then rotational| translation matrix (R|t), to get the world point.
Is my procedure correct?? What can be wrong ?
result
image_point(x,y) =400,380
world_point z co ordinate(distance) = 12.53
image_point(x,y) =400,180
world_point z co ordinate(distance) = 5.93
problem
I am getting very few pixels for z coordinate ,
That means z co ordinate is << 1 m , (because effective pixel size in meters = 10 ^-5 )
This is my matlab code
%positive downward pitch
xR = 0.033;
yR = 0;
zR = pi;
%effective pixel size in meters = 10 ^-5 ; focal_length x & y = 0.012 m
% principal point x & y = 320 and 240
intrinsic_params =[1200,0,320;0,1200,240;0,0,1];
Rx=[1,0,0 ; 0,cos(xR),sin(xR); 0,-sin(xR),cos(xR)];
Ry=[cos(yR),0,-sin(yR) ; 0,1,0 ; sin(yR),0,cos(yR)];
Rz=[cos(zR),sin(zR),0 ; -sin(zR),cos(zR),0 ; 0,0,1];
R= Rx * Ry * Rz ;
% The camera is 1.17m above the ground
t=[0;117000;0];
extrinsic_params = horzcat(R,t);
% extrinsic_params is 3 *4 matrix
P = intrinsic_params * extrinsic_params; % P 3*4 matrix
% make it square ....
P_sq = [P; 0,0,0,1];
%image size is 640 x 480
%An arbitrary pixel 360,440 is entered as input
image_point = [400,380,0,1];
% world point will be in the form X Y Z 1
world_point = P_sq * image_point'
Your procedure is kind of right, however it is going in the wrong direction.
See this link. Using your intrinsic and extrinsic calibration matrix you can find the pixel-space position of a real-world vector, NOT the other way around. The exception to this is if your camera is stationary in the global frame and you have the Z position of the feature in the global space.
Stationary camera, known feature Z case: (see also this link)
%% First we simulate a camera feature measurement
K = [0.5 0 320;
0 0.5 240;
0 0 1]; % Example intrinsics
R = rotx(0)*roty(0)*rotz(pi/4); % orientation of camera in global frame
c = [1; 1; 1]; %Pos camera in global frame
rwPt = [ 10; 10; 5]; %position of a feature in global frame
imPtH = K*R*(rwPt - c); %Homogeneous image point
imPt = imPtH(1:2)/imPtH(3) %Actual image point
%% Now we use the simulated image point imPt and the knowledge of the
% features Z coordinate to determine the features X and Y coordinates
%% First determine the scaling term lambda
imPtH2 = [imPt; 1];
z = R.' * inv(K) * imPtH2;
lambda = (rwPt(3)-c(3))/z(3);
%% Now the RW position of the feature is:
rwPt2 = c + lambda*R.' * inv(K) * imPtH2 % Reconstructed RW point
Non-stationary camera case:
To find the real-world position or distance from the camera to a particular feature (given on the image plane) you have to employ some method of reconstructing the 3D data from the 2D image.
The two that come to mind immediately is opencv's solvePnP and stereo-vision depth estimation.
solvePnP requires 4 co-planar (in RW space) features to be available in the image, and the positions of the features in RW space known. This may not sound useful as you need to know the RW position of the features, but you can simply define the 4 features with a known offset rather than a position in the global frame - the result will be the relative position of the camera in the frame the features are defined in. solvePnP gives very accurate pose estimation of the camera. See my example.
Stero vision depth estimation requires the same feature to be found in two spatially-separate images and the transformation between the images in RW space must be known very precisely.
There may be other methods but these are the two I am familiar with.
I have random non-overlapping spheres (stationary) in a cube. I am trying to implement periodic boundary condition on the walls, so that if there are any half sphere on the edge it appears on the other side. This seems to be a well studied problem, but am not sure how should i implement it on spheres.
At the start of the code, i would have random sphere position (c, r), where c = [ x y z] inside or on the edges of cube of dimension (dims), where dims = [ l b h ].
Code for selecting a random sphere in a cube:
function [ c, r ] = randomSphere_1( dims )
% creating one sphere at random inside [0..dims(1)]x[0..dims(2)]x...
% radius and center coordinates are sampled from a uniform distribution
% over the relevant domain.
%
% output: c - center of sphere (vector cx, cy,... )
% r - radius of sphere (scalar)
r = 0.15 + ( 0.55 - 0.15) .* rand(1);% radius varies between 0.15mm - 0.55mm
c = bsxfun (#times,(dims) , rand(1,3)) + r; % to make sure sphere is placed inside or on the edge of the cube
% periodic condition
*if*
I am trying to build a code if the center co-ordinates fall on the edge or over them then there should be periodicity in spheres that is the the other half should be on the other side. I have added an image just to give an idea about what i mean by periodic boundary condition. So the spheres on the edges are exactly how i want. How should i proceed with the problem?
I have data that records the x and y positions of an animal in a 2D assay over time stored in a matlab matrix. I can plot these co-ordinates over time, and extract the velocity information and plot this using cline.
The problem I am having at the moment is calculating the heading angle. It should be a trivial trigonometry question, but I am drawing a blank on the best way to start.
The data is stored in a matrix xy representing x and y co-ordinates:
796.995391705069 151.755760368664
794.490825688073 150.036697247706
788.098591549296 145.854460093897
786.617021276596 144.327659574468
781.125000000000 140.093750000000
779.297872340426 138.072340425532
775.294642857143 133.879464285714
What I would like to be able to do is know the angle of the line drawn from (796.995, 151.755) to (794.490, 150.036), and so on. My research suggests atan2 will be the appropriate function, but I am unsure how to call it correctly to give useful information.
difx = xy(1,1) - xy(2,1);
dify = xy(1,2) - xy(2,2);
angle = atan2(dify,difx);
angle = angle*180/pi % convert to degrees
The result is 34.4646. Is this correct?
If it is correct, how do I get the value to be in the range 0-360?
You can use the diff function to get all the differences at once:
dxy = diff(xy); % will contain [xy(2,1)-xy(1,1) xy(2,2)-xy(1,2); ...
Then you compute the angle using the atan2 function:
a = atan2(dxy(:,2), dxy(:,1));
You convert to degrees with
aDeg = 180 * a / pi;
And finally take the angle modulo 360 to get it between 0 and 360:
aDeg = mod(aDeg, 360);
So - you pretty much got it right, yes. Except that you have calculated the heading from point 2 to point 1, and I suspect you want to start at 1 and move towards 2. That would give you a negative number - or modulo 360, an angle of about 325 degrees.
Also, using the diff function gets you the entire array of headings all at once which is a slight improvement over your code.
[rc mi]=
EDIT the problem of "phase wrapping" - when the heading goes from 359 to 0 - is quite a common problem. If you are interested in knowing when a large change happens, you can try the following trick (using aDeg from above - angle in degrees).
dDeg1 = diff(aDeg); % the change in angle
dDeg2 = diff(mod(aDeg + 90, 360)); % we moved the phase wrap point by 180 degrees
dDeg12 = [dDeg1(:) dDeg2(:)]';
[rc mi]= min(abs(dDeg12));
indx = sub2ind(size(dDeg12), mi, 1:size(dDeg12, 2));
result = dDeg12(ii);
What I did there: one of the variables (dDeg or dDeg2) does not see the phase wrap, and the min function finds out which one (it will have a smaller absolute difference). The sub2ind looks up that number (it is either positive or negative - but it's the smaller one of the two), and that is the value that ends up in result.
You can verify the angle by plotting a little line that starts at the first point and end in the direction of the heading. If the angle is correct, it will point in the direction of the next point in xy. Everything depends on where yo define 0 degrees at (straight up, say) from and whether positive degrees is rotation counterclockwise (I do) or clockwise. In MATLAB you can get the numbers between 0 and 360 but using modulo---or you can just add 180 to your results but this will change the definition of where the 0 degree mark is.
I made the following script that is a bit complex but shows how to calculate the heading/angle for all points in vector format and then displays them.
xy =[ 796.995391705069 151.755760368664
794.490825688073 150.036697247706
788.098591549296 145.854460093897
786.617021276596 144.327659574468
781.125000000000 140.093750000000
779.297872340426 138.072340425532
775.294642857143 133.879464285714];
% t = linspace(0,3/2*pi, 14)';
% xy = [sin(t), cos(t)];
% calculate the angle:
myDiff = diff(xy);
myAngle = mod(atan2(myDiff(:,1), myDiff(:,2))*180/pi, 360);
% Plot the original Data:
figure(1);
clf;
subplot(1,3,1);
plot(xy(:,1), xy(:,2), '-bx', 'markersize', 12);
hold all
axis equal;grid on;
title('Original Data');
% Plot the calculated angle:
subplot(1,3,2);
plot(myAngle);
axis tight; grid on;
title('Heading');
% Now plot the result with little lines pointing int he heading:
subplot(1,3,3);
plot(xy(:,1), xy(:,2), '-bx', 'markersize', 12);
hold all
% Just for visualization:
vectorLength = max(.8, norm(xy(1,:)- xy(2,:)));
for ind = 1:length(xy)-1
startPoint = xy(ind,:)';
endPoint = startPoint + vectorLength*[sind(myAngle(ind)); cosd(myAngle(ind))];
myLine = [startPoint, endPoint];
plot(myLine(1,:), myLine(2, :), ':r ', 'linewidth', 2)
end
axis equal;grid on;
title('Original Data with Heading Drawn On');
For example, if you use my test data
t = linspace(0,3/2*pi, 14)';
xy = [sin(t), cos(t)];
You get the following:
and if you do yours you get
Note how the little red line starts at the original data point and moves in the direction of the next point---just like the original blue line connecting the points.
Also note that the use of diff in the code to difference all the points properly at once. This is faster and avoids any problems with the direction--looks like in your case it's swapped.