Cited by 51Indoor and Outdoor Localization TechnologiesInertial Sensor and NavigationGait Recognition and Analysis

Smart Insole-Based Indoor Localization System for Internet of Things Applications

Chen, Diliang, Cao, Huiyi, Chen, Huan, Zhu, Zetao, Qian, Xiaoye, Xu, Wenyao, Huang, Ming-Chun·2019·IEEE Internet of Things Journal

Abstract

With the development of Internet of Things (IoT), indoor localization has been a research focus in recent years. For inertial measurement unit (IMU)-based indoor localization method, zero velocity update (ZUPT) uses the known velocity at stationary epoch as a benchmark to calibrate the velocity drift. However, stationary epoch only takes up 24% of a whole gait cycle time, and the velocity drift at the remaining 76% time is usually estimated according to an assumption that velocity has a linear drift over time, which would introduce errors. In this paper, a two-step velocity calibration method was proposed based on human gait characteristics with Smart Insole: known velocity update (KUPT) and double-foot position calibration (DFPC). KUPT could measure the velocity from heel-strike to toe-off based on the recorded real-time foot angle and the shoe dimensions, which increases the time period when the velocity could be measured from 24% to 62% of a whole gait cycle time. DFPC method could fuse the position information of both feet based on the symmetrical characteristic of human gait to further increase the reliability of the localization results. The statistical result of a 20 times 20-m walking experiment showed that KUPT method was more accurate and reliable than ZUPT method for both feet, and DFPC method could further improve the result of KUPT method. Another experiment about walking in an indoor environment for 91 m showed that the proposed KUPT+DFPC method had an error of about 0.78 m which is acceptable for most IoT applications.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/jiot.2019.2915791

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 53 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chen, D., Cao, H., Chen, H., Zhu, Z., Qian, X., Xu, W., & Huang, M.-C.
Affiliations
  • Case Western Reserve University (US)
  • University at Buffalo, State University of New York (US)
Venue
IEEE Internet of Things Journal
Published
2019-08
Volume
6
Issue
4
Pages
7253-7265
ISSN
  • 2327-4662 (ISSN-L)
  • 2372-2541
OpenAlex
W2944417826
Cited by
51
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 1
FWCI
2.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE Internet of Things Journal (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (NSF-1664368)
  • Ohio Bureau of Workers’ Compensation: Ohio Occupational Safety and Health Research Program
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Indoor and Outdoor Localization Technologies
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Inertial Sensor and Navigation
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Gait Recognition and Analysis
Keywords
indoor positioning, smart insoles, inertial measurement unit, zero velocity update, human walking, foot angle, wearable sensors, Internet of Things

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review