Visit https://ebooknice.

com to download the full version and

explore more ebooks

(Ebook) Location-Based Services Handbook:

Applications, Technologies, and Security by Syed A.
Ahson, Mohammad Ilyas ISBN 9781420071962, 1420071963

_____ Click the link below to download _____

https://ebooknice.com/product/location-based-services-
handbook-applications-technologies-and-security-1659774

Explore and download more ebooks at ebooknice.com

Here are some recommended products that might interest you.
You can download now and explore!

(Ebook) Biota Grow 2C gather 2C cook by Loucas, Jason; Viles, James

ISBN 9781459699816, 9781743365571, 9781925268492, 1459699815,
1743365578, 1925268497

https://ebooknice.com/product/biota-grow-2c-gather-2c-cook-6661374

ebooknice.com

(Ebook) VoIP Handbook: Applications, Technologies, Reliability, and

Security by Syed A. Ahson, Mohammad Ilyas ISBN 9781420070200,
1420070207

https://ebooknice.com/product/voip-handbook-applications-technologies-
reliability-and-security-1373556

ebooknice.com

(Ebook) RFID Handbook: Applications, Technology, Security, and Privacy

by Syed A. Ahson, Mohammad Ilyas ISBN 9781420054996, 9781420055009,
1420054996, 1420055003

https://ebooknice.com/product/rfid-handbook-applications-technology-
security-and-privacy-1941124

ebooknice.com

(Ebook) Matematik 5000+ Kurs 2c Lärobok by Lena Alfredsson, Hans

Heikne, Sanna Bodemyr ISBN 9789127456600, 9127456609

https://ebooknice.com/product/matematik-5000-kurs-2c-larobok-23848312

ebooknice.com
(Ebook) Handbook of Wireless Local Area Networks: Applications,
Technology, Security, and Standards by Mohammad Ilyas, Syed A. Ahson
ISBN 9780849323232, 0849323231

https://ebooknice.com/product/handbook-of-wireless-local-area-
networks-applications-technology-security-and-standards-916830

ebooknice.com

(Ebook) SAT II Success MATH 1C and 2C 2002 (Peterson's SAT II Success)

by Peterson's ISBN 9780768906677, 0768906679

https://ebooknice.com/product/sat-ii-success-
math-1c-and-2c-2002-peterson-s-sat-ii-success-1722018

ebooknice.com

(Ebook) Handbook of Wireless Local Area Networks: Applications,

Technology, Security, and Standards (Internet and Communications) by
Mohammad Ilyas, Syed A. Ahson ISBN 0849323231

https://ebooknice.com/product/handbook-of-wireless-local-area-
networks-applications-technology-security-and-standards-internet-and-
communications-2150756
ebooknice.com

(Ebook) WiMAX: Technologies, Performance Analysis, and QoS by Syed A.

Ahson, Mohammad Ilyas ISBN 9781420045239, 9781420045253, 1420045237,
1420045253

https://ebooknice.com/product/wimax-technologies-performance-analysis-
and-qos-1365206

ebooknice.com

(Ebook) Fixed Mobile Convergence Handbook by Syed A. Ahson, Mohammad

Ilyas ISBN 9781420091700, 9781420091748, 1420091700, 1420091743

https://ebooknice.com/product/fixed-mobile-convergence-
handbook-1927108

ebooknice.com
Location-Based
Services
Handbook
Applications, Technologies,
and Security
Location-Based
Services
Handbook
Applications, Technologies,
and Security
Edited by
Syed A. Ahson and Mohammad Ilyas

Boca Raton London New York

CRC Press is an imprint of the

Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
MATLAB® is a trademark of The MathWorks, Inc. and is used with permission. The MathWorks does not
warrant the accuracy of the text or exercises in this book. This book’s use or discussion of MATLAB® soft-
ware or related products does not constitute endorsement or sponsorship by The MathWorks of a particular
pedagogical approach or particular use of the MATLAB® software.

CRC Press
Taylor & Francis Group
6000 Broken Sound Parkway NW, Suite 300
Boca Raton, FL 33487-2742

© 2011 by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC

CRC Press is an imprint of Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa business

No claim to original U.S. Government works

Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

International Standard Book Number-13: 978-1-4200-7198-6 (Ebook-PDF)

This book contains information obtained from authentic and highly regarded sources. Reasonable efforts
have been made to publish reliable data and information, but the author and publisher cannot assume
responsibility for the validity of all materials or the consequences of their use. The authors and publishers
have attempted to trace the copyright holders of all material reproduced in this publication and apologize to
copyright holders if permission to publish in this form has not been obtained. If any copyright material has
not been acknowledged please write and let us know so we may rectify in any future reprint.

Except as permitted under U.S. Copyright Law, no part of this book may be reprinted, reproduced, transmit-
ted, or utilized in any form by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented,
including photocopying, microfilming, and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system,
without written permission from the publishers.

For permission to photocopy or use material electronically from this work, please access www.copyright.
com (http://www.copyright.com/) or contact the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. (CCC), 222 Rosewood
Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, 978-750-8400. CCC is a not-for-profit organization that provides licenses and
registration for a variety of users. For organizations that have been granted a photocopy license by the CCC,
a separate system of payment has been arranged.

Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used
only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
Visit the Taylor & Francis Web site at
http://www.taylorandfrancis.com

and the CRC Press Web site at

http://www.crcpress.com
Contents

Preface .................................................................................................................... vii

Editors ......................................................................................................................xi
Contributors ......................................................................................................... xiii

1. Positioning Technologies in Location-Based Services ........................... 1

Eladio Martin, Ling Liu, Michael Covington, Peter Pesti,
and Matthew Weber

2. Wireless Location Technology in Location-Based Services................. 47

Junhui Zhao and Xuexue Zhang

3. Location in Wireless Local Area Networks............................................. 67

Marc Ciurana, Israel Martin-Escalona, and Francisco Barcelo-Arroyo

4. Radio Frequency Identification Positioning ...........................................91

Kaoru Sezaki and Shin’ichi Konomi

5. Supporting Smart Mobile Navigation in a Smart Environment ......109

Haosheng Huang

6. Indoor Location Determination: Environmental Impacts,

Algorithm Robustness, and Performance Evaluation.........................131
Yiming Ji

7. Location-Aware Access Control: Scenarios, Modeling

Approaches, and Selected Issues .............................................................155
Michael Decker

8. Location-Based Services and Privacy .....................................................189

Nabil Ajam

9. Protecting Privacy in Location-Based Applications ............................207

Calvert L. Bowen III, Ingrid Burbey, and Thomas L. Martin

10. Presence Services for the Support of Location-Based

Applications .................................................................................................233
Paolo Bellavista, Antonio Corradi, and Luca Foschini

v
vi Contents

11. Data-Flow Management for Location-Based Service

Applications Using the Zoning Concept ............................................... 261
Suleiman Almasri and Ziad Hunaiti

12. Assisted Global Navigation Satellite Systems: An Enabling

Technology for High Demanding Location-Based Services .............279
Paolo Mulassano and Fabio Dovis
Index .....................................................................................................................299
Preface

Mobile devices today are boasting processing power and memory on par
with that found in desktop computers. Wireless connectivity has become
much more readily available. Many metropolitan areas feature large-scale
wireless networks, and cellular or satellite connections are accessible in many
remote areas. Furthermore, we are seeing a continuous decrease in the cost
of hardware—the mobile devices themselves, as well as accessories, such as
global positioning system (GPS) units. As people are increasingly mobile in
terms of lifestyle and occupational behavior, and there is a demand for deliv-
ering information to them according to their geographical location, a new
system known as location-based services (LBSs) was developed by integrat-
ing satellite navigation, mobile networking, and mobile computing to enable
such services. Such a system combines the location information of the end
user with intelligent application in order to provide related services. The LBS
system has become popular since the beginning of this decade mainly due to
the release of GPS signals for use in civilian applications.
With the continuous decrease in the cost of these devices, we see not
only the use of the location-aware devices proliferating in an increasing
number of civilian and military applications, but also a growing demand
for continuously being informed while on the road, in addition to staying
connected. Many of these applications require efficient and highly scalable
system architecture and system services for supporting dissemination of
location-dependent resources and information over a large and growing
number of mobile users. Meanwhile, depending on wireless positioning,
geographic information systems (GIS), application middleware, applica-
tion software, and support, the LBS is in use in every aspect of our lives. In
particular, the growth of mobile technology makes it possible to estimate
the location of the mobile station in LBS. In the LBS, we tend to use posi-
tioning technology to register the movement of the mobile station and use
the generated data to extract useful knowledge, so that it can defi ne a new
research area that has both technological and theoretical underpinnings.
The subject of wireless positioning in LBS has drawn considerable attention.
In the wireless systems in LBS, transmitted signals are used for positioning.
By using characteristics of the transmitted signal itself, the location estima-
tion technology can estimate how far one terminal is from another or where
that terminal is located. In addition, location information can help optimize
resource allocation and improve cooperation in wireless networks. While
wireless service systems aim at providing support to the tasks and interac-
tions of humans in physical space, accurate location estimation facilitates a
variety of applications, which include areas of personal safety, industrial mon-
itoring and control, and a myriad of commercial applications, e.g., emergency

vii
viii Preface

localization, intelligent transport systems, inventory tracking, intruder detec-

tion, tracking of fire-fighters and miners, and home automation. Besides appli-
cations, the methods used for retrieving location information from a wireless
link are also varied. However, although there may be a variety of different
methods employed for the same type of application, factors including com-
plexity, accuracy, and environment play an important role in determining the
type of distance measurement system.
LBSs will have a dramatic impact in the future, as clearly indicated by
market surveys. The demand for navigation services is predicted to rise by
a combined annual growth rate of more than 104% between 2008 and 2012.
This anticipated growth in LBSs will be supported by an explosion in the
number of location-aware devices available to the public at reasonable prices.
An in-Stat market survey estimated the number of GPS devices and IEEE
802.11 (Wi-Fi) devices in the United States in 2005 to be approximately 133
and 120 million, respectively. The report also estimated market penetration
would increase to approximately 137 million by 2006 for GPS and 430 million
by 2009 for Wi-Fi.
Many of today’s handheld devices include both navigation and communi-
cation capabilities, e.g., GPS and Wi-Fi. This convergence of communication
and navigation functions is driving a shift in the device market penetration
from GPS-only navigation devices (90% in 2007) to GPS-enabled handsets
(78% by 2012). These new, multifunction devices can use several sources
for location information, including GPS and applications like Navizon
(Navizon) and Place Lab (Place Lab), to calculate an estimate of the user’s
location. Navizon and Place Lab both use multiple inputs, including GPS
and Wi-Fi, to generate estimates of the user’s current location.
This book provides technical information on all aspects of LBS technol-
ogy. The areas covered range from basic concepts to research grade mate-
rial including future directions. This book captures the current state of LBS
technology and serves as a source of comprehensive reference material on
this subject. It has a total of 12 chapters authored by 50 experts from around
the world. The targeted audience for the Handbook include professionals
who are designers and/or planners of LBS systems, researchers (faculty
members and graduate students), and those who would like to learn about
this field.
The book is expected to have the following specific salient features:

• To serve as a single comprehensive source of information and as

reference material on LBS technology
• To deal with an important and timely topic of emerging technology
of today, tomorrow, and beyond
• To present accurate, up-to-date information on a broad range of
topics related to LBS technology
• To present the material authored by the experts in the field
Preface ix

• To present the information in an organized and well-structured

manner

Although the book is not precisely a textbook, it can certainly be used as a

textbook for graduate courses and research-oriented courses that deal with
LBS. Any comments from the readers will be highly appreciated.
Many people have contributed to this handbook in their unique ways.
First and foremost, the group that deserves immense gratitude is the group
of highly talented and skilled researchers who have contributed 13 chapters
to this handbook. All of them have been extremely cooperative and profes-
sional. It has also been a pleasure to work with Nora Konopka, Amy Blalock,
and Glen Butler at CRC Press, and we are extremely grateful for their sup-
port and professionalism. Our families have extended their unconditional
love and strong support throughout this project and they all deserve very
special thanks.

Syed Ahson
Seattle, Washington, USA

Mohammad Ilyas
Boca Raton, Florida, USA

MATLAB® is a registered trademark of The MathWorks, Inc. For product

information, please contact:

The MathWorks, Inc.

3 Apple Hill Drive
Natick, MA 10760-2098 USA
Tel: 508-647-7000
Fax: 508-647-7001
E-mail: [email protected]
Web: www.mathworks.com
Editors

Syed Ahson is a senior software design engineer with Microsoft. As part of

the Mobile Voice and Partner Services group, he is busy creating new and
exciting end-to-end mobile services and applications. Prior to Microsoft, Syed
was a senior staff software engineer with Motorola, where he contributed sig-
nificantly in leading roles toward the creation of several iDEN, CDMA, and
GSM cellular phones. Syed has extensive experience with wireless data pro-
tocols, wireless data applications, and cellular telephony protocols. Prior to
joining Motorola, Syed was a senior software design engineer with NetSpeak
Corporation (now part of Net2Phone), a pioneer in VoIP telephony software.
Syed has published more than ten books on emerging technologies such as
cloud computing, mobile web 2.0, and service delivery platforms. His recent
books include Cloud Computing and Software Services: Theory and Techniques
and Mobile Web 2.0: Developing and Delivering Services to Mobile Phones. Syed
has authored several research papers and teaches computer engineering
courses as adjunct faculty at Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, Florida,
where he introduced a course on Smartphone technology and applications.
Syed received his MS degree in computer engineering in July 1998 at Florida
Atlantic University. Syed received his BSc degree in electrical engineering
from Aligarh University, India, in 1995.
Dr. Mohammad Ilyas is associate dean for research and industry relations
at the College of Engineering and Computer Science at Florida Atlantic
University, Boca Raton, Florida. Previously, he has served as chair of the
Department of Computer Science and Engineering and interim associ-
ate vice president for research and graduate studies. He received his PhD
degree from Queen’s University in Kingston, Canada. His doctoral research
was about switching and flow control techniques in computer communica-
tion networks. He received his BSc degree in electrical engineering from the
University of Engineering and Technology, Pakistan, and his MS degree in
electrical and electronic engineering at Shiraz University, Iran.
Dr. Ilyas has conducted successful research in various areas, including traf-
fic management and congestion control in broadband/high-speed communi-
cation networks, traffic characterization, wireless communication networks,
performance modeling, and simulation. He has published over 25 books on
emerging technologies, and over 150 research articles. His recent books include
Cloud Computing and Software Services: Theory and Techniques (2010) and Mobile
Web 2.0: Developing and Delivering Services to Mobile Phones (2010). He has super-
vised 11 PhD dissertations and more than 37 MS theses to completion. He has
been a consultant to several national and international organizations. Dr. Ilyas
is an active participant in several IEEE technical committees and activities. Dr.
Ilyas is a senior member of IEEE and a member of ASEE.
xi
Contributors

Nabil Ajam Fabio Dovis

TELECOM Bretagne Politecnico di Torino
Rennes, France Torino, Italy

Suleiman Almasri Luca Foschini

Petra University Università degli Studi di Bologna
Amman, Jordan Bologna, Italy

Francisco Barcelo-Arroyo Haosheng Huang

University of Catalonia Vienna University of Technology
Barcelona, Spain Vienna, Austria

Paolo Bellavista Ziad Hunaiti

Università degli Studi Anglia Ruskin University
di Bologna Chelmsford, UK
Bologna, Italy
Yiming Ji
Calvert L. Bowen III University of South Carolina
Viginia Tech Beaufort, South Carolina
Blacksburg, Virginia
Shin’ichi Konomi
Ingrid Burbey Tokyo Denki University and JST/
Viginia Tech CREST
Blacksburg, Virginia Tokyo, Japan

Marc Ciurana Ling Liu

University of Catalonia Georgia Institute of Technology
Barcelona, Spain Atlanta, Georgia

Antonio Corradi Eladio Martin

Università degli Studi di Bologna Georgia Institute of Technology
Bologna, Italy Atlanta, Georgia

Michael Covington Thomas L. Martin

Georgia Institute of Technology Viginia Tech
Atlanta, Georgia Blacksburg, Virginia

Michael Decker Israel Martin-Escalona

University of Karlsruhe (TH) University of Catalonia
Karlsruhe, Germany Barcelona, Spain

xiii
xiv Contributors

Paolo Mulassano Matthew Weber

Istituto Superiore Mario Boella Georgia Institute of Technology
(ISMB) Georgia, Atlanta
Turin, Italy
Junhui Zhao
Peter Pesti Beijing Jiaotong University
Georgia Institute of Technology Beijing, China
Atlanta, Georgia
Xuexue Zhang
Kaoru Sezaki Beijing Jiaotong University
The University of Tokyo Beijing, China
Tokyo, Japan
1
Positioning Technologies in
Location-Based Services

Eladio Martin, Ling Liu, Michael Covington,

Peter Pesti, and Matthew Weber

CONTENTS
1.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................2
1.1.1 Overview of localization systems....................................................3
1.2 Geometric Principles for Location Estimation .......................................... 5
1.2.1 Trilateration ........................................................................................6
1.2.2 Multilateration ....................................................................................6
1.2.3 Triangulation ...................................................................................... 8
1.2.4 Comparison between trilateration, multilateration, and
triangulation ....................................................................................... 8
1.3 Main Localization Techniques ..................................................................... 9
1.3.1 Time of arrival ....................................................................................9
1.3.1.1 Radiofrequency technologies .......................................... 10
1.3.1.2 Laser technology ............................................................... 12
1.3.1.3 Ultrasound technology .................................................... 13
1.3.1.4 Sounds technology ........................................................... 14
1.3.2 Time difference of arrival ............................................................... 14
1.3.3 Received signal strength indication .............................................. 15
1.3.3.1 Common localization technologies based on
received signal strength indication fingerprinting ...... 17
1.3.3.2 Common localization technologies based
on received signal strength indication with
theoretical propagation models ...................................... 18
1.3.4 Angle of arrival ................................................................................ 19
1.4 Other Localization Methods ...................................................................... 21
1.4.1 Inertial navigation systems ............................................................ 21
1.4.2 Proximity-based methods ..............................................................22
1.4.2.1 Convex positioning ...........................................................22
1.4.2.2 Centroid .............................................................................. 23
1.4.2.3 Center of gravity of overlapping areas .......................... 23
1.4.2.4 Probabilistic techniques ................................................... 24
1.4.2.5 Hop-count based methods .............................................. 24

1
2 Location-Based Services Handbook

1.4.2.6 Amorphous localization................................................... 24

1.4.2.7 Main technologies using proximity for localization ... 25
1.4.3 Environment-based localization techniques ............................... 26
1.4.4 Multimode approach for localization ........................................... 28
1.4.4.1 Introduction ....................................................................... 28
1.4.4.2 Diversity of technologies ................................................. 29
1.4.4.3 Diversity of localization techniques ............................... 29
1.4.4.4 Diversity of reference objects: Multiple
neighboring terminals and cooperative localization ...30
1.5 Comparison and Outlook ........................................................................... 32
1.6 Conclusions................................................................................................... 33
Acknowledgments ................................................................................................ 37
References............................................................................................................... 37

1.1 Introduction
Mobile devices today boast processing power and memory on par with
that found in desktop computers. Wireless connectivity has become much
more readily available. Many metropolitan areas feature large-scale wire-
less networks and cellular or satellite connections are accessible in many
remote areas. Furthermore, we are seeing a continuing decrease in the cost
of hardware—the mobile devices themselves, as well as accessories, such
as global positioning system (GPS) units. What was once a cost-prohibitive,
underpowered, immature technology is now a reality.
With the continued decrease in the prices of these devices, we see not only
the use of the location-aware devices escalating in an increasing number of
civilian and military applications, but also a growing demand for continuously
being informed while on the road, in addition to staying connected. Many of
these applications require an efficient and highly scalable system architecture
and system services to support dissemination of location-dependent resources
and information over a large and growing number of mobile users.
Consider a metropolitan area with hundreds of thousands of vehicles.
Drivers and passengers in these vehicles are interested in information rel-
evant to their trips. For example, a driver would like her vehicle to display
continuously on a map the list of Starbucks coffee shops within 10 miles
around the current location of the vehicle. Another driver may be inter-
ested in the available parking spaces near the destination, say the Atlanta
Fox Theater, in the next 30 min. Some driver may also want to monitor the
traffic conditions five miles ahead (e.g., average speed). Such information or
resources are important for drivers to optimize their travel and alleviate traf-
fic congestion by better planning of their trip and avoiding wasteful driving.
A key challenge is how to disseminate effectively the location-dependent
information (traffic conditions) and resources (parking spaces, Starbucks
Positioning Technologies in Location-Based Services 3

coffee shops) in this highly mobile environment, with an acceptable delay,

overhead, and accuracy.
One of the fundamental components common to all location-based ser-
vices (LBSs) is the use of positioning technologies to track the movement of
mobile clients and to deliver information services to the mobile clients on
the move at the right time and right location. Therefore, the effective use of
positioning technologies can have a significant impact on the performance,
reliability, security, and privacy of LBSs, systems, and applications.
In this chapter, we will present an overview of the localization techniques
in LBSs, aiming at understanding the key factors that impact the efficiency,
accuracy, and usability of existing and emerging positioning technologies.

1.1.1 Overview of localization systems

A generic localization system based on an underlying communications net-
work consists of two key components: the portable device or mobile terminal
carried by the user, and the base stations or beacon nodes constituting the
infrastructure of the communications network. Existing localization tech-
niques rely on measurement methods to estimate ranges by means of which
the user’s location can be calculated. Consequently, two separate phases can
be distinguished in the process: the initial range measurement phase to cal-
culate some range (typically distance or angle) between the user’s device and
the beacon nodes, and the positioning estimation phase where a geometric
principle is applied with the obtained ranges to estimate the user’s location.
The main geometric principles used to estimate locations are trilateration,
multilateration, and triangulation, and these principles will be explained in
detail in Section 1.2.
Figure 1.1 gives a sketch of a generic scenario with a user moving along the
coverage area of a communications network, whose location has to be esti-
mated by means of the information exchanged between the user’s mobile ter-
minal and the network infrastructure. In general, two types of scenarios can
be distinguished considering the direction in which the signals exchanged
between a user and the infrastructure will travel: (1) The user’s mobile ter-
minal may receive signals originating from the network infrastructure’s
beacons working as landmarks of known location. (2) The beacons may be
receiving signals from the user’s mobile terminal in an attempt to let the
network estimate its location.
In the first scenario, the user’s mobile terminal receives signals from the
network infrastructure’s beacon nodes; these beacons usually transmit iden-
tification signals containing technical parameters on a periodic basis, in
order to let users know about their presence. Some measurable quality of
these signals can be utilized by the user’s device to estimate a range from the
beacon nodes. For example, if the user’s radio frequency (RF) device is capa-
ble of measuring the power from the received signal, a comparison of the
power difference from transmitter to receiver can be leveraged to estimate
4 Location-Based Services Handbook

User moving

time = t 3 time = t 2 time = t 1

Beacon 3 Beacon 2 Beacon 1

FIGURE 1.1
Basic representation of a generic infrastructure to allow the estimation of the user’s location.

the distance between them, making use of a radio propagation model. In

the same sense, if the user’s device can precisely measure the time of arrival
(ToA) of the signal, the time elapsed from transmission to reception can be
employed to calculate distance by means of the space-time relationship with
the speed of the signal. In general, the infrastructure provided by the under-
lying technology will allow the user’s device to observe signals originating
from multiple beacon nodes, which can be employed to estimate the user’s
location through the application of basic geometric principles, which will be
explained in detail in Section 1.3.
The second scenario applies to the infrastructure’s beacon nodes receiv-
ing signals from the user’s mobile terminal. In this case, the user’s device
transmits signals for the network infrastructure to extract some measurable
quality. These measurements can be employed by each of the beacon nodes
receiving the signals from a user’s mobile terminal to estimate the distance
separating them from the user. Eventually, and in analogy with the previous
case, multiple distances can be used to obtain locations through the applica-
tion of geometric principles (see Section 1.3 for details).
Many positioning techniques have been proposed, developed, and
deployed in production. The most widely accepted classification of local-
ization techniques are “range based” and “range free” (Poovendran et
al. 2006). The former obtains either distances or directions from reference
points and estimates locations through trilateration or multilateration when
distances are available, or triangulation when directions are the known
data. Distances can be calculated through the study of the received signals
(strength or ToA), while directions can be determined through the angle
of arrival (AoA) of the signal. On the other hand, range-free techniques,
Positioning Technologies in Location-Based Services 5

also called by some authors “connectivity based” or “proximity based”

(Poovendran et al. 2006), estimate locations making use of the proxim-
ity information to several reference points. Although this is a simple and
widely accepted classification, there is a need to distinguish a group of tech-
niques based on environmental features that can be sensed and leveraged to
infer locations without the need to apply complicated and error-prone mea-
surements or geometric principles (Hightower and Borriello 2001; Kaiser
et al. 2009; Abielmona and Groza 2007). For example, simple detection of
pressure or light events would constitute the environmental features that
could be used for localization. We will refer to this group of techniques as
“environment based” in this chapter.
In this chapter, we classify the existing and emerging localization tech-
niques into two categories: geometric based and environment based, accord-
ing to whether the location measurement techniques are geometric based
or environment based. It is clear that range-based techniques, regardless of
their use of distance or direction, are founded on geometry to estimate loca-
tions. On the other hand, proximity-based techniques, such as those that rely
on node proximity or node connectivity instead of geometric distance, ulti-
mately resort to geometric principles to estimate locations. Thus, we classify
proximity-based techniques under the umbrella of “geometry-based” tech-
niques (Anjum and Mouchtaris 2007). Consequently, throughout the rest of
this chapter, the different localization methods that can be used to enable
LBSs will be classified into two main categories: geometry-based techniques
and environment-based techniques. The former is mainly measurement
based while the latter is primarily observation based.
In the remainder of the chapter, we will first review the geometric prin-
ciples for positioning in LBSs. Then, in Section 1.3, we describe the four most
popular geometry-based localization techniques, including ToA, time dif-
ference of arrival (TDoA), received signal strength indication (RSSI), and
AoA. In Section 1.4, we give a brief overview of other positioning tech-
niques, including inertial navigation systems and proximity-based methods,
environment-based techniques, and a multimode approach to localization.
Section 1.5 concludes the chapter.

1.2 Geometric Principles for Location Estimation

Most of the popular positioning technologies used today in LBSs and appli-
cations are geometry-based methods, regardless of whether they are range
based or proximity based. A common feature of all geometry-based localiza-
tion techniques is their use of geometric principles, such as triangulation,
trilateration, and multilateration, to estimate locations. It is important to note
that although some researchers (Abielmona and Groza 2007; Hightower and
Borriello 2001) make use of concepts such as angulation or lateration, these
6 Location-Based Services Handbook

are generalizations of triangulation and trilateration/multilateration, respec-

tively. In Section 1.3, we will provide a detailed discussion on geometry-based
localization techniques with examples on the concrete localization technolo-
gies in terms of how each of these principles is used in practice. In general,
different positioning technologies (e.g., Wimax, Wi-Fi, UWB, and RFID) will
make use of certain geometric principles (e.g., triangulation, trilateration,
multilateration) that best leverage their respective positioning techniques
(e.g., ToA, TDoA, RSSI, AoA).

1.2.1 Trilateration
Trilateration is a method used to determine the intersection of three sphere
surfaces given the centers and radii of the three spheres. The trilateration
principle is used specially for ToA and RSSI. By trilateration, the location
point of a mobile object is obtained through the intersection of three spheres,
or so-called beacons, provided that the centers and the radii of the spheres
are known. This technique usually relies on the use of the RSSI or ToA of a
signal between two nodes in order to obtain the radius of each sphere. In
the case of ToA, the clocks in both ends of the communication must be syn-
chronized; otherwise, the method to use is multilateration. Mathematically,
the estimated location in a three-dimensional (3D) space (x, y, z) will be the
solution of the following system of equations:

r12 = ( x − xc1 ) + ( y − yc1 ) + ( z − zc1 ) ,

2 2 2

r2 2 = ( x − xc 2 ) + ( y − yc 2 ) + ( z − zc 2 ) ,
2 2 2

r3 2 = ( x − xc 3 ) + ( y − yc 3 ) + ( z − zc 3 ) ,
2 2 2

where (xc1, yc1, zc1), (xc2, yc2, zc2), and (xc3, yc3, zc3) represent the locations of the
three beacons to which a mobile object is referencing its location; these coor-
dinates are the centers of the spheres whose intersection will represent the
estimated location of the object. On the other hand, r1, r2, and r3 denote the
calculated distances from the object to each of the three beacons, represent-
ing the radii of the spheres.

1.2.2 Multilateration
Multilateration is a position estimation principle using measurements of
TDoA at (or from) three or more sites. Multilateration is also known as hyper-
bolic positioning and it refers to the process of locating an object through the
intersection of hyperboloids, which result either from accurately computing
the TDoA of a signal sent from that object and arriving at three or more
receivers, or by measuring the TDoA of a signal transmitted from three or
Positioning Technologies in Location-Based Services 7

more synchronized transmitters and arriving at the receiver object. As there

is no need for absolute measurements of ToA, synchronization between ter-
minals and beacons is not required.
Mathematically, the 3D solution determines the location of an object in a
three-dimensional space, say (x, y, z), by transmitting a signal to a set of four
beacons with known locations (xc1, yc1, zc1), (xc2, yc2, zc2), (xc3, yc3, zc3), and (xc4,
yc4, zc4), the travel times of the signal from the mobile object to each of the
four beacons, denoted by t1, t2, t3, and t4, respectively, is equal to the distance
between the object and one of the beacons divided by the speed of the signal
(the pulse propagation rate). For simplicity, we consider that speed to be c. By
solving the following equations, we can obtain the estimated location of the
object (x, y, z):

( x − xc1 )2 + ( y − yc1 ) + ( z − zc1 )2

2

t1 =
c

( x − xc 2 )2 + ( y − yc 2 ) + ( z − zc 2 )2
2

t2 = ,
c

( x − xc 3 )2 + ( y − yc 3 ) + (z − zc 3 )2
2

t3 = ,
c

( x − xc 4 )2 + ( y − yc 4 ) + (z − zc4 )2
2

t4 = .
c

Again, for simplicity purposes, considering the fourth beacon to be located

at the origin of the coordinate system:

( xc 4 , yc 4 , zc 4 ) = (0 , 0 , 0).

Now, by obtaining the TDoA between the signals arriving at the beacon at
the origin and those arriving at the other beacons:

( x − xc1 )2 + ( y − yc1 ) + ( z − zc1 )2 − ( x )2 + ( y) + ( z )2

2 2

Δt1 = t1 − t4 = ,
c

( x − xc 2 )2 + ( y − yc 2 ) + ( z − zc 2 )2 − ( x )2 + ( y) + ( z )2
2 2

Δt2 = t2 − t4 = ,
c

( x − xc 3 )2 + ( y − yc 3 ) + ( z − zc 3 )2 − ( x )2 + ( y) + ( z )2
2 2

Δt3 = t3 − t4 = .
c
8 Location-Based Services Handbook

These three equations represent three separate hyperboloids, and their

intersection will correspond to the estimated location. It is important to note
that the addition of extra beacons would allow us to enhance the reliability
or to gain more accuracy through the use of statistical methods (Loschmidt
et al. 2007).

1.2.3 Triangulation
In contrast to trilateration, which uses distances or absolute measurements
of time-of-flight from three or more sites, or with multilateration, which uses
measurements of TDoA at (or from) three or more sites, triangulation is the
process of determining the location point of an object by measuring angles to
the object’s location from two or more beacons of known locations at either
end of a fixed baseline, rather than measuring distances to the object’s loca-
tion point directly. The location point of the object can then be fixed as the
third point of a triangle with one known side and two known angles.
The triangulation principle is based on the laws of plane trigonometry,
which state that, if one side and two angles of a triangle are known, the other
two sides and angle can be readily calculated (Britannica 2009), and the loca-
tion of a point is generally determined by measuring angles from beacons of
known locations, and solving a triangle. The trigonometric laws of sines and
cosines ruling this process are (Poovendran et al. 2006):

b
C A

a c
B

A B C
Sines Rule: = = .
sin a sin b sin c

C 2 = A2 + B2 + 2 AB cos( c)
Cosines Rule: B2 = A2 + C 2 − 2 CA cos( b) .
A 2 = B2 + C 2 − 2B C cos( a)

1.2.4 Comparison between trilateration, multilateration, and triangulation

In general, trilateration is more precise than multilateration and requires
a smaller number of beacons (Jimenez et al. 2005). Within trilateration, in
Positioning Technologies in Location-Based Services 9

terms of security, the use of ToA is considered the most appropriate method
(Clulow et al. 2006), since RSSI and AoA can be easily spoofed. Even if tri-
lateration (making use of ToA over short distances, typical in indoor envi-
ronments) may endure large errors due to synchronization limitations
(Krishnamachari 2005), it can still outperform RSSI techniques in terms of
precision and robustness (Poovendran et al. 2006). As a matter of fact, even
multilateration through TDoA can achieve higher accuracy than techniques
based on RSSI (Niculescu and Nath 2003).

1.3 Main Localization Techniques

In this section, we will give an overview of the main localization techniques
(ToA, TDoA, RSSI, AoA), focusing on the most appropriate technologies to
be used with each of them, and showing particular examples for each case.
It must be noted that each technology can theoretically make use of one or
more localization techniques to deliver location information, and the selec-
tion will depend on factors such as the hardware capabilities of the technol-
ogy. For example, there is a growing trend to leverage Wi-Fi access points
for localization making use of RSSI; nevertheless, with the appropriate
hardware enhancements (e.g., instead of clocks with microsecond precision,
using clocks with nanosecond precision), Wi-Fi access points can provide
more accurate location information making use of ToA. More details about
this and many other interesting possibilities will be given throughout the
rest of this chapter.

1.3.1 Time of arrival

This principle is commonly used with different technologies, including RF,
ultrasounds (US), infrared (IR), and visible light. Distances are computed
through the space-time relationship with the speed of the signal:

Distance
Speed of signal = .
ToA

Acoustic and US signals, thanks to their relatively low speed, can deliver sub-
meter accuracy at the expense of security and dedicated hardware (Capkun
et al. 2008; Sedighpour et al. 2005). When ToA is used only with RF signals in
indoor environments, the high speed of these signals can help enhance the
security of the localization system, but very precise clock synchronization
between transmitters and receivers is required to avoid large errors. In par-
ticular, clock synchronization should be in the range of nanoseconds, which
could represent an important hurdle in terms of cost. An alternative could
10 Location-Based Services Handbook

be the use of RF signals combined with US signals, with which centimetric

precision can be achieved without the need for expensive clocks (Priyanta
et al. 2000). Nevertheless, the dedicated hardware and the security risks
involved with US make researchers avoid this technology (Sedighpour et al.
2005). Two different approaches can be distinguished to measure times: the
one-way mode, where the receiver measures the time-of-flight of the signal
from the transmitter (requiring time synchronization between transmitter
and receiver), and the two-way mode, in which the transmitter measures the
round-trip-time of the signal it sends to the receiver, and where time syn-
chronization between both sides is not required. A remarkable example rep-
resenting a hybrid of both approaches is shown in Sastry et al. (2003), where
the Echo protocol is introduced. This protocol makes use of both RF and US,
with the objective of verifying the location of a Prover within a region sur-
rounding the Verifier. It can achieve excellent precision because of the use of
US to measure the time-of-flight between Prover and Verifier. Moreover, no
time synchronization between Prover and Verifier is required. Furthermore,
it does not require cryptography or any previous agreement between Prover
and Verifier, which makes it suitable for low-cost devices. Nevertheless, the
assumption that the processing time at the claimant to receive the RF signal
and send the US signal can be ignored, could be leveraged by an attacker
to spoof its location. Furthermore, the use of US represents a major weak-
ness; in fact, many researchers in the field of secure localization try to avoid
the use of US, not only because of the cost associated with the need for a
dedicated system (Vora and Nesterenko 2006; Broutis et al. 2006), but more
importantly, because of the security issues it faces; in particular, an attacker
can substitute US by a faster technology (e.g., laser-based bugging [Sastry
et al. 2003; Laser 2009]) to claim shorter distance (Sedighpour et al. 2005); an
attacker can also modify the transmission medium to increase the speed of
the signal and again claim shorter distance (Singelee and Preneel 2005). In
general, US cannot be regarded as a secure technology whenever an attacker
can influence the area of interest (Capkun et al. 2008).
Time can be measured precisely using a wide variety of technologies,
and consequently, the ToA principle can be successfully applied to tech-
nologies making use of various types of signals, including RF, US, IR, and
laser signals. Next, we present a review of the main technologies that make
use of the ToA principle to estimate locations.

1.3.1.1 Radiofrequency technologies

Although any technology can measure time-of-flight of signals, in practi-
cal terms some minimum hardware requirements are needed in order to
obtain time measurements with a precision good enough to allow an accu-
rate estimation of distances. In order for a RF technology to be able to deliver
precise time measurements that can be used to estimate locations with an
accuracy of at least some meters for indoor environments, the clock of that
Positioning Technologies in Location-Based Services 11

technology should ideally have a precision in the range of nanoseconds.

Nevertheless, even without a very precise clock, some RF technologies are
still employed to estimate locations through the measurement of times of
flights of signals. As will be detailed in this section, the most common tech-
nologies used for localization based on the ToA principle are ultra wide band
(UWB), radio frequency identification (RFID), GPS, cellular communications
technologies, Wi-Fi, and digital TV (DTV). Of these, UWB is one of the most
promising (Fontana 2004, 2007; Fontana et al. 2007; Fontana and Richley
2007; Multispectral 2009; Tippenhauer and Capkun 2008). In particular, the
use of short pulses can deliver the following advantages: (i) Low probability
of detection (security enhancement), (ii) High immunity to multipath (the
errors due to multipath can be reduced using technologies with very wide
bandwidths like UWB [Patwari et al. 2001]), (iii) High energy efficiency (duty
cycles of 0.002% can be achieved, making active tags’ battery replacement
necessary only after 4 years [Fontana 2004]), (iv) Excellent precision for rang-
ing and localization (ToA resolutions better than 40 psec have been reported
[Fontana 2007], which translates into a spatial resolution of 12 mm).
Commercial localization systems based on UWB can work with ranges of
over 200 m and location accuracies of around 30 cm (Multispectral 2009).
A typical example of the use of UWB technology with ToA (and AoA) is
the Ubisense localization system (Ubisense 2009), which splits the coverage
area in cells, taking into account that every fixed node (sensor) has a range
of around 10 m. Mobile terminals can be located with a precision lower
than 30 cm. However, these systems have some drawbacks: (i) High eco-
nomic cost in comparison with other technologies. Nevertheless, economies
of scale could lower costs in the future. (ii) Unless hardware modifications
are carried out in some of the commercial UWB platforms, it will be impos-
sible to implement existing secure protocols at the time of measuring round-
trip-times, since no real challenge-response can be implemented, but only
request-answer (no additional data apart from ID can be transmitted to the
Prover) (Tippenhauer and Capkun 2008).
Cellular communications technologies such as GSM, UMTS, or CDMA2000
can also be used for localization with the ToA principle (Wang et al. 2008),
achieving accuracies ranging from tens to hundreds of meters (Capkun
et al. 2008). Examples of mobile-assisted localization techniques making use
of ToA measurements include:

A-GPS (assisted GPS) (Feng and Law 2002; Fuente 2007; Palenius
and Wigren 2009): mobile terminals equipped to receive GPS signals
relay the calculated position (or the captured information from the
satellites, in case the terminals do not compute their own location)
through the cellular network, where a location server will help the
mobile terminal to improve the accuracy and reduce the latency of
the location estimation to a few seconds (Lo Piccolo et al. 2007). Goze
et al. (2008) have analyzed the performance improvements brought
12 Location-Based Services Handbook

about by the new A-GPS architecture based on secure user-plane

location.
AFLT (advanced forward link trilateration) (Wang and Wylie-Green
2004; Wang et al. 2001): the mobile terminal obtains time measure-
ments of signals from nearby base stations, reporting those values
back to the network, which will use them to estimate the location of
the terminal through trilateration.

Regarding Wi-Fi, although the clock precision of typical IEEE 802.11 b and
g cards does not allow good precision to be obtained when ToA is applied for
localization, Gunther and Christian (2005) show that the round-trip time can
be useful under certain circumstances to estimate distances between nodes,
reporting errors of a few meters. Nevertheless, using round-trip times of a
packet to calculate distances to several Wi-Fi access points in order to esti-
mate locations is usually a software-based solution, since generic Wi-Fi plat-
forms lack high precision hardware for this type of measurement, thereby
making the results inaccurate (Loschmidt et al. 2007).
In relation to DTV, the Advanced Television System Committee (ATSC)
DTV signals include a new feature, a pseudorandom sequence that can be
used as an RF watermark, and that can be uniquely assigned to each DTV
transmitter for identification purposes (Wang et al. 2006). By means of rel-
atively simple signal processing, DTV signals from different transmitters
can be identified. Since the locations of the DTV transmitters are known,
this information can be used to locate a receiver. Similar techniques can be
applied to digital video broadcasting-terrestrial systems (Wang et al. 2006).
In comparison with GPS, DTV signals have a much higher effective radiated
power, and use lower frequencies, making them suitable for indoor localiza-
tion; however, co-channel interference may introduce large errors. Making
use of these signals, Wang et al. (2006) propose a new localization technique
leveraging the time synchronization between DTV transmitters and receiver.
In particular, the ToA of the signals from the DTV transmitters to the receiver
is measured with the help of the sync field of the ATSC signal frames. Possible
sources of errors include: clock error for the DTV stations and synchroniza-
tion errors between transmitters and receiver (these two types of errors could
be mitigated with the use of atomic clocks), errors due to multipath (could
be minimized by time averaging), and errors due to variable atmospheric
conditions (could be tackled with the use of empirical models for specific
weather and geographic conditions).

1.3.1.2 Laser technology

Lidar (light detection and ranging) technology is one of the most promising
technologies for localization because of its very high resolution, and espe-
cially considering the evolution of communication systems to increase their
capacity and use higher frequencies, which will ultimately reinforce the
Positioning Technologies in Location-Based Services 13

potential of laser communication. Laser range finders estimate distances to

objects using laser pulses. Similar to the radar technology, which uses radio
waves instead of light, the distance to an object is determined by measur-
ing the time-of-flight for a pulse that is sent and returned to the transmit-
ter after reflecting off the target. The fact that there is no processing at the
bouncing object together with the transmission of the pulses at the speed
of light eliminates two of the main vulnerabilities that other technologies,
such as US, face in terms of possible location spoofing attacks. Thanks to
the development of relatively low-priced, eye-safe, laser range finders,
they are currently being used for mapping and surveying tasks and also for
localization with mobile robots, in which case, resolutions of 10 mm have
been reported for a range of 1m (Brscic and Hashimoto 2008). In the same
sense, Armesto and Tornero (2006) present a set of algorithms for mobile
robot self-localization using a laser ranger and geometrical maps. Other
examples of laser technology used to track people can be found in Zhao
and Shibasaki (2005).

1.3.1.3 Ultrasound technology

The use of US to estimate locations has been widely embraced by the research
community, mainly because of the high accuracy achieved and the lack of
interference with RF equipment. However, security issues surrounding this
technology, together with the requirement for a dedicated infrastructure
represent its main drawbacks. Examples of localization systems making use
of US technology include:

Active bats: developed in 1999 by AT&T (Harter et al. 1999) for in-
building localization, a network of US receptors connected to a cen-
tral RF transmitter is placed on the ceiling of rooms. The person or
object to be tracked must carry a small US transmitter called a bat.
When this bat receives a RF trigger signal from the central transmit-
ter, it broadcasts a US signal. At the same time that the bat receives
the RF trigger signal, all the US receptors receive an electromagnetic
pulse for synchronization. The time elapsed between the transmis-
sion of the US signal by the bat and the reception of it by the US
receptors is used to estimate the bat’s position. The system achieves
a precision of 9 cm, 95% of the time.
Cricket: similar to “active bats” but providing privacy, since the US
sensors placed on the ceiling are transmitters instead of receptors,
and consequently, the calculation of the location is performed at
the local level, within the mobile terminal. Moreover, the number
of required nodes is smaller. There are two versions of the system,
Cricket (Priyantha et al. 2000) and Cricket Compass (Balakrishnan
and Priyantha 2003), with precisions ranging from 2 to 30 cm.
14 Location-Based Services Handbook

Dolphin (Fukuju et al. 2003): with the intention to improve active bats
and “Cricket,” this system simplifies the configuration of the fixed
nodes through a distributed algorithm, achieving precisions of up
to 15 cm.
Hexamite (2009): making use of transmitters, receptors, and control-
lers, this system can work as active bats or Cricket; although a large
amount of fixed nodes is required, it can achieve precisions of 1 cm.

1.3.1.4 Sounds technology

Making use of the same principles of US-based systems, 3D-Locus (Jimenez
et al. 2005) employs sound signals for precise indoor localization. In com-
parison with US, the lower frequencies result in a larger range; consequently
the density of beacons required to cover the same area is slightly lower.
Another advantage is that most portable devices already have micro-
phones and speakers that can be used for this system. Moreover, the system
could also allow CDMA codification of signals in order to avoid interfer-
ence, which would also help to improve its robustness against possible
attacks. Nevertheless, the lower than c (300,000 km/sec) speed of these
signals makes them share the vulnerabilities explained for US technology.
Moreover, background noise stronger than air conditioning could deteriorate
its performance.

1.3.2 Time difference of arrival

Hyperbolic navigation systems such as Decca, Omega, Loran-C, and others
are based on the measurement of TDoA of signals transmitted from sev-
eral beacons and the subsequent use of multilateration (Appleyard et al.
1988). Consequently, the estimated location will be the intersection of several
hyperbolae, one for every couple of beacons. It is interesting to note that in
some of these hyperbolic systems (e.g., Omega, Decca) the time difference
is measured as a difference in the phases of the two received signals (Proc
2007). Nevertheless, and regardless of the type of technique used by each
system, this survey will not focus on these and other electronic navigation
systems (including radar navigation [Skolnik 2008]), mainly intended for
large vehicles, ships, or aircrafts; the exceptions are the Global Navigation
Satellite Systems (Ghilani and Wolf 2008) such as GPS, which are much more
versatile and also applicable for handy portable devices. It is also noteworthy
that due to the large errors suffered by these radio navigation systems (hun-
dreds of meters), many have already been substituted by GPS.
Wi-Fi networks can also be used for localization, by making use of TDoA.
For example, Loschmidt et al. (2007) present a localization method based on
TDoA employing precise clocks to improve the accuracy of the localization
point. Results show that in order to obtain accuracies within a meter, nano-
second clock precisions are required.
Positioning Technologies in Location-Based Services 15

Cellular communications technologies can also make use of the TDoA prin-
ciple to estimate locations, and the two main techniques are uplink time dif-
ference of arrival (U-TDOA) and enhanced observed time difference (E-OTD):

U-TDOA: a network-based solution that can be implemented in a

non-intrusive way without affecting the handsets. It estimates the
mobile terminal’s position through the calculation of the time differ-
ence for a signal transmitted from the terminal to reach several base
stations (Bertoni and Suh 2005). Focusing on GSM networks, these
time measurements are carried out by “location measurement units”
installed at the base stations, which will be used by a “serving mobile
location center” to estimate the location (3GPP 2002). This technique
works with existing mobile terminals without the need for upgrades
(Andrew 2009), and achieves good accuracy and latency perfor-
mance without the requirement of special hardware or software in
the mobile terminal. However, its main drawback is the cost associ-
ated with the additional network infrastructure required. In the case
of GSM, these positioning methods and the required modifications
in the network architecture have been defined by the ETSI/3GPP in
ETSI (1999).
E-OTD: a mobile-assisted technique, in which the mobile terminal
measures the TDoA of signals from different towers, estimates its
position and reports it back to the network (Xiaopai et al. 2003). In
order to use this technology, the mobile terminal must have previ-
ously been configured for it. Accuracies achieved range from 100 to
500 m (Singh and Ismail 2005). Precise test results for E-OTD can be
found in Halonen et al. (2003).

1.3.3 Received signal strength indication

By means of theoretical or empirical radio propagation models, signal strength
measurements can be converted into distances. The following is a general
radio propagation model expression delivering the received power Pr:
n
⎛ λ ⎞
Pr = Pt ⎜ Gt Gr ,
⎝ 4πd ⎟⎠

where Pt is the transmitted power, λ is the wavelength, Gt and Gr repre-

sent the gains of the transmitter and receiver, respectively, d is the distance
between them, and n is the path loss coefficient, typically ranging from 2 to
6 depending on the environment. Depending on the use given to the RSSI
values to estimate locations, two main approaches can be distinguished:
“fingerprinting,” where a prerecorded radio map of the area of interest is
leveraged to estimate locations through best matching, and “propagation
16 Location-Based Services Handbook

based,” in which RSSI is employed to estimate distances computing the path

loss. Considering propagation-based techniques outside free space environ-
ment, errors of up to 50% (Poovendran et al. 2006) due to multipath, non-line-
of-sight conditions, interferences, and other shadowing effects (Nasipuri and
Li 2002) can render this technique unreliable and inaccurate. For example,
practical measurements based on RSSI for indoor environments to track
down devices within a cubicle, have shown that the location estimates are
erroneous 33% of the time (Patwari et al. 2001). Nevertheless, these results
for indoor environments can be noticeably improved by introducing new
factors in the path loss model to account for conditions such as wall attenu-
ation (Bahl and Padmanabhan 2000), multipath, or noise (Singh et al. 2004).
On the other hand, fingerprinting techniques can provide better accuracy
than propagation-based techniques (Brida et al. 2005). Through the consid-
eration of empirical models, fingerprinting or “radio map matching” tech-
niques have been successfully applied for localization. In these techniques,
the mobile terminal estimates its location through the best match between
the measured radio signal and a previously recorded radio map. This pro-
cess consists of two phases:

1. Static preview of the environment, also called training phase or

offline phase, in which a radio map of the area in study is built.
Usually, RF signal strengths broadcasted by beacons are recorded
at different locations; the separation between these chosen loca-
tions will depend on the area in study, and for instance, for indoor
environments this separation can be around 1 m (Varshavsky et al.
2007, 2). Each measurement consists of several readings, one for each
radio source in range (Otsason et al. 2005). The main disadvantage
of this method is that the recorded map can only be used for the
studied area (e.g., a building), and the cost increases with the area to
be covered.
2. Dynamic measurement phase or online phase, in which the mobile
terminal estimates its location through best matching between the
radio signals being received and those previously recorded in the radio
map. For this, a localization algorithm will be employed that can make
use of deterministic or probabilistic techniques:
Deterministic techniques store scalar values of averaged RSSI measure-
ments from the access points (Roxin et al. 2007). The most relevant
techniques in this group are:
a. “Closest point” (Bahl and Padmanabhan 2000), or “nearest
neighbor in signal space” (Dempster et al. 2008)
b. “Nearest neighbor in signal space-average” (Roxin et al. 2007;
Mahtab et al. 2007; Fang and Lin 2008; Bahl et al. 2000), choosing
k nearest neighbors and calculating the centroid of that set
Positioning Technologies in Location-Based Services 17

c. “Smallest polygon,” selecting several nearest neighbors that

will form various polygons, and the centroid of the smallest
polygon will be considered as the estimated location (Roxin
et al. 2007)
Probabilistic techniques choose the location from the radio map as the
one with the highest probabilities, taking into account the variabil-
ity of the RSSI values with time and environmental conditions, and
storing RSSI distributions (mean and standard deviation) from the
different beacons at each location in the radio map (Haeberlen et al.
2004; Youssef and Agrawala 2004).

Comparison studies between fingerprinting and the theoretical prop-

agation-based approach show that fingerprinting has the potential to out-
perform propagation-based approaches (Krishnamachari 2005; Brida et al.
2005), but it requires a costly training phase and may be rendered useless in
environments with highly dynamic radio characteristics.

1.3.3.1 Common localization technologies based on received

signal strength indication fingerprinting
Fingerprinting techniques have proven to be especially appropriate for the
range of frequencies in which GSM and Wi-Fi networks operate (approxi-
mately 850 MHz to 2.4 GHz) for two main reasons (Otsason et al. 2005): the
signal strengths present an important spatial variability within 1–10 m, and
those signal strengths show reliable consistency in time.
Although GSM utilizes power control both at the mobile terminal and base
station, data on the broadcast control channel (BCCH) is transmitted at full
and constant power, consequently this channel can be used for fingerprint-
ing (Otsason et al. 2005; Varshavsky et al. 2007). Noticeable improvement can
be obtained if a selection among the listened signals is performed, rejecting
those that are either too noisy, too stable across all areas, or simply do not
provide enough information (Varshavsky et al. 2007, 2). This selective proce-
dure will help optimize memory and computing capabilities and speed up
the matching process.
The main Wi-Fi-based localization solutions making use of RSSI finger-
printing are as follows:

• Radar (Bahl and Padmanabhan 2000): represents the first finger-

printing system to achieve the localization of portable devices in a
small building, with a precision of 2–3 m. For the training phase,
measurements were collected approximately every square meter.
• Horus (Youssef 2004): makes use of the Radar system to improve its
performance through probabilistic analysis.
18 Location-Based Services Handbook

• Compass (King et al. 2006): applies probabilistic methods based on

the object orientation to improve precision, obtaining errors below
1.65 m.
• Ekahau (2009): commercial solution using 802.11 b/g networks,
achieving precisions from 1 to 3 m in normal conditions.

Bluetooth technology can also be employed with fingerprinting, and in

this sense Rodriguez (2006) presents a system similar to Radar (Bahl and
Padmanabhan 2000) but using Bluetooth technology, obtaining precision
errors below 1.2 m in 79% of the cases.
Conventional radio represents an attractive technology for localization
due to the widespread use of receivers, and its wide coverage (indoors
and outdoors). For instance, Krumm et al. (2003) present a localiza-
tion algorithm based on RSSI measurements of the digitally encoded
data transmitted on frequency sidebands from FM radio stations.
Nevertheless, the requirement for dedicated hardware and the fact that
devices can be located only down to a suburb (some LBSs may require
higher resolutions), represent important drawbacks. However, the use of
signal strength simulators and constraints for the possible changes in the
terminals’ locations could simplify the localization process and enhance
the accuracy of the location to a certain degree (Krumm et al. 2003). It
would be interesting to further research the possibilities offered by Radio
Data System (Radio Broadcast Data System in the USA) used in conven-
tional FM radio broadcasts, as well as the different standards developed
to broadcast digital audio.
DTV can also be used with fi ngerprinting (Otsason et al. 2005).
Examples of the use of Zigbee technology with fingerprinting include:
Tadakamadla (2006) presents a system for vehicle and people tracking in
indoor environments, obtaining precisions close to 3 m. Noh et al. (2008)
propose the combination of fingerprinting in Zigbee with the nearest neigh-
bor algorithm to find the closest predefined locations. Lin et al. (2006) also
make use of fingerprinting to estimate locations, showing that it is possi-
ble to obtain accuracies between 1 and 2 m. Nevertheless, Noh et al. (2008)
highlight the difficulties of the fingerprinting technique when changes in
the environment take place, since the costly training phase may need to be
repeated.

1.3.3.2 Common localization technologies based on received signal

strength indication with theoretical propagation models
Although the use of fingerprinting techniques for indoor localization gener-
ally outperforms those focused on propagation-based methods, the appli-
cation of modifications to the theoretical propagation model to account
for changes in environmental conditions can lead to effective localization
Positioning Technologies in Location-Based Services 19

systems, as shown in Ali and Nobel (2007) and references therein. Examples
of technologies working with this concept include:

Wi-Fi: Ali and Nobel (2007) show recent research in the use of 802.11
b/g standards for localization, focusing on a propagation-based
approach, reporting errors below 2 m.
Bluetooth: in comparison with Wi-Fi, the shorter range of Bluetooth
can provide more accurate positioning at the expense of higher
infrastructure requirements in terms of the number of base stations
(Hazas et al. 2003). Figueiras et al. (2005) present a propagation-
based indoor localization system making use of RSSI values, obtain-
ing errors around 3 m or lower in 90% of the cases analyzed.
RFID: one of the first projects developed with the idea of RFID tags,
SpotON (Hightower et al. 2000), uses RSSI to estimate distances
between readers and tags, and calculates the position of the object
through trilateration. It achieves a precision of around 3 m, very
dependent on the environment, and the time required to estimate
locations varies around 10–20 sec (Subramanian et al. 2008). An evo-
lution of the SpotON idea is presented in Landmarc (Ni et al. 2003),
using active RFID tags, and reporting precision errors above 1 m.
Nevertheless, these systems still suffer from long scanning and com-
puting latencies (Subramanian et al. 2008). Other recent localization
systems make use of a robot carrying an RFID reader that detects
RFID tags previously deployed in the area of interest at precisely
known locations. The location estimation errors can be reduced by
increasing the number of tags, or using optimum tag deployments
outperforming the conventional square patterns (Han et al. 2007).
Zigbee: Mendalka et al. (2008) show the practical implementation
of a localization algorithm for wireless sensor networks based on
Zigbee. Making use of RSSI values available in the transceiver chips
and the known positions of beacon nodes, locations are estimated
through trilateration. In the same sense, Noh et al. (2008) propose the
estimation of locations using trilateration, through the experimen-
tal calculation of a relationship between RSSI and distance for the
particular area of interest. Chen and Meng (2006) show that the use
of a theoretic signal propagation model and the elimination of the
costly training phase inherent to fingerprinting techniques can still
provide good accuracies (close to 1 m) if cooperation between nodes
is applied to improve the localization algorithm.

1.3.4 Angle of arrival

In general, AoA is based on the use of special antenna configurations (typi-
cally an antenna array or a directional antenna) to estimate the direction of
20 Location-Based Services Handbook

signals from beacon nodes. Several researchers rely on this approach because
of the inherent inaccuracies in RSSI, the risk of large errors due to synchro-
nization inexactitudes in ToA and TDoA when only RF signals are used in
indoor environments, or the extra hardware requirement of the latter tech-
niques when US signals are used to improve their accuracy. Nevertheless,
when AoA is used with RF signals, since the general radio propagation
function from where the angles are obtained is the same one employed in
the RSSI approach, AoA will share security vulnerabilities with RSSI, in
addition to the variability or possible errors in the antennas’ gains, which
could be maliciously used to spoof locations. Other possible sources of errors
include the fact that radio waves can experience a change of direction due to
differences in the conducting and reflecting properties of different types of
terrain, particularly land and water. From a general security point of view,
these systems could be easily spoofed by making use of reflections (Clulow
et al. 2006).
One of the first radio navigation systems, the radio direction finder
(Bowditch 2004), used a directional antenna to find the direction of broad-
casting antennas. Obtaining two directions and knowing the distance
between the two broadcasting antennas, the receiver’s position can be calcu-
lated, solving the triangle. A practical implementation of the AoA principle
for localization in wireless sensor networks can be found in Nasipuri and Li
(2002), where nodes estimate their locations with respect to a set of beacons
that cover the area in study with powerful directional antennas continu-
ously transmitting a unique signal on a narrow beam rotated at a constant
angular speed. The main drawbacks of this approach are the errors due to
the non-zero width of the directional antenna beam (could be acceptable for
beam widths within 15 degrees), and the costly implementation of the spe-
cial beacon nodes. Another example of the use of AoA for localization can be
found in Niculescu and Nath (2003), where it is also interesting to note that
the authors hint at the need for multimode operation in order to enhance the
performance of positioning algorithms, suggesting the combination of AoA
with ranging (distance estimation), compasses and accelerometers.
Computer vision and simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM) can
be employed to estimate locations through triangulation, since it is possible
to calculate angles to landmark sightings with the help of cameras (Chen
et al. 2007). Computer vision makes use of a matching process with a pre-
compiled database of images (Kourogi and Kurata 2003). These systems are
appealing in the sense that they do not require users to wear any kind of tag
(Hazas et al. 2003). However, the main disadvantage of this approach is the
potential need for very large databases. For example, Chhaniyara et al. (2007)
present a self-localization approach aimed at vehicles that can place easily
recognizable markers in the environment, which are used by on-board com-
puter vision sensors to orient the vehicle. Furthermore, the light or visual
information captured by a camera (Hightower and Borriello 2001, 2) can also
be processed to significantly enhance accuracy (Darrell et al. 1998). SLAM is
Positioning Technologies in Location-Based Services 21

similar to the computer vision approach, but without the need for precom-
piled databases. In particular, SLAM is used by autonomous vehicles and
robots building up a map within an unknown environment while keeping
track of their own location. For example, Folkesson et al. (2006) describe the
use of SLAM in the context of robot navigation in an office using a camera.
Statistical techniques used in SLAM to handle localization uncertainties and
to improve signal-to-noise ratio include Kalman filters (Gutmann 2002; Chen
et al. 2007), particle filters (Marzorati et al. 2007; Elinas et al. 2006), and scan
matching of range data (Huang and Song 2008). In comparison with com-
puter vision systems making use of large databases, SLAM is not as reliable
and may accrue errors over distance and time, especially in poor visibility or
unfavorable light conditions (Ojeda and Borenstein 2007).
Within RF technologies, all those that can use arrays of antennas, either
at the base station or at the mobile terminal, are candidates for AoA local-
ization. The implementation of arrays of antennas at the base station
(e.g., cellular communications) could have a good return on investment
depending on factors such as the number of users or type of applications.
On the other hand, the implementation of arrays of antennas at the mobile
terminal would require the use of high enough frequencies to achieve spa-
tial diversity within the mobile terminal’s size constraints (Ramachandran
2007); in this sense, technologies such as UWB or Wimax represent good
candidates.

1.4 Other Localization Methods

1.4.1 Inertial navigation systems
These are navigation systems based on dead reckoning (estimation of loca-
tion making use of previous position, speed over elapsed time, and course),
which compute locations employing motion sensors such as accelerometers
(measurement of non-gravitational accelerations) and gyroscopes (measure-
ment of orientation). Since these methods utilize vectorial magnitudes and
initial positions to estimate new locations, we will classify them as “geometric”
techniques.
Although mostly used in air navigation, accelerometers have already
been included in several portable electronic devices such as Nokia N95,
Sony Ericsson W910i, Blackberry Storm, iPhone, and iPod Nano 4G. One
of the main advantages of inertial navigation systems is that once the
starting position is obtained, no external information is required; con-
sequently, they are not affected by adverse weather conditions and they
cannot be jammed or suffer from the security vulnerabilities inherent to
other methods relying on external beacons. However, these systems suf-
fer from integration drift, making errors accumulate and therefore must
22 Location-Based Services Handbook

be corrected by some other system (Grewal et al. 2001), which makes them
ideal candidates to complement other navigation or localization systems
in a multimode approach. For example, Popa et al. (2008) analyze the com-
bination of INS and the Cricket localization system (Priyanta et al. 2000)
for indoor environments or GPS for outdoors. Actually, INS and GPS have
been successfully integrated not only in air navigation (Grewal et al. 2001),
but also in many other circumstances including train navigation (Mazl
and Preucil 2003). More recently, Zmuda et al. (2008) hint at the effective-
ness of integrating multiple localization methodologies to compensate for
the possible inadequacies of each other, and show that a joint approach of
RSSI together with INS is superior to the use of either method individu-
ally. In the same sense, Evennou and Marx (2006) and Wang et al. (2007)
examine the combination of WLAN fi ngerprinting localization with INS,
resulting in an improvement in localization accuracy, and Sczyslo et al.
(2008) study the combination of UWB localization and INS, showing an
increase in accuracy and robustness for the integrated solution. All these
recent multimode approaches are being facilitated by the progressive
price reduction of micro electrical mechanical systems (MEMS), which
are the basis for inertial sensors (Sczyslo et al. 2008).

1.4.2 Proximity-based methods

In these methods, nodes do not explicitly calculate distances, but estimate
their locations based on connectivity and proximity constraints to known
beacons, ultimately resorting to the same geometric principles as the range-
based methods. They are less accurate but have lower costs than the previ-
ous methods. Although directional antennas may be needed in some cases,
in general there is no need for expensive hardware since there is no need to
measure physical magnitudes. As coarse accuracy is sufficient in some appli-
cations (especially for sensor networks), solutions based on node proximity
have been proposed as a cost-effective alternative to more expensive geomet-
ric schemes. Besides the simple cell identification technique, which equals
the location of the terminal with the location of the access point or base sta-
tion to which it is connected, the most common proximity-based localization
methods are as follows.

1.4.2.1 Convex positioning

Node positions in the network are estimated based on connectivity-induced
constraints, i.e., the communication links between a node and other peer
nodes constitute a set of geometric constraints on its location (Doherty et al.
2001). In other words, the node must be located in the geometric region
described by the intersection of the geometric areas created by the commu-
nication links with other nodes. Eventually, the solution is obtained through
convex optimization.
Positioning Technologies in Location-Based Services 23

1.4.2.2 Centroid
Anchor nodes of known location or beacons broadcast their position to
neighbors, which keep records of all received beacons. Making use of this
proximity information, a centroid model is applied to estimate the location
of the non-anchor nodes (Bulusu et al. 2000). The formula summarizing this
technique in three dimensions is:

⎛ N N N
⎞
⎜ ∑ ∑ ∑ z ⎟⎟
xi yi i

( estimated estimated estimated ) ⎜⎜

x , y , z = i =1
N , i =1
N , i =1
N ⎟
,
⎜
⎜⎝ ∑i ∑i ∑
i =1 i =1 i =1
i⎟
⎟⎠

where (xi, yi, zi) represent the coordinates of each beacon, and N is the
number of beacons that can be listened from the node in study. One of
the main drawbacks of the algorithm proposed in Bulusu et al. (2000)
is the assumption that the reference nodes should be placed uniformly
throughout the network, thereby making the system prone to attacks.

1.4.2.3 Center of gravity of overlapping areas

1.4.2.3.1 Point-in-triangle test
Beacon nodes equipped with high-powered transmitters are used to split the
area under study into several triangular regions. The vertices of these tri-
angles will be the beacon nodes, and some of these triangles will overlap. A
node can narrow down the area in which it can potentially reside by check-
ing whether it is in or out of these triangles. Eventually, the center of gravity
of the intersection of all the triangles in which a node resides is taken as the
estimated position (He et al. 2003).

1.4.2.3.2 Center of gravity of overlapping sectors

Lazos and Poovendran (2005, 2006) present schemes based on directional
antennas. In particular, the anchor nodes are equipped with several direc-
tional antennas, in such a way that the system nodes (these, on the other
hand, are equipped with omnidirectional antennas) can receive multiple
beacons from multiple anchors. The estimated location of the system node
corresponds with the center of gravity of the overlapping region created
by the different directional antennas’ sectors listened by the node. In
order to improve the location resolution of the system without the need
to deploy more anchors or increase the number of directional antennas in
each anchor, Lazos and Poovendran (2006) propose to make anchor nodes
capable of varying their transmission range and changing their anten-
nas’ directions. The idea is to reduce the size of the overlapping region
24 Location-Based Services Handbook

by reducing the size of antennas’ sectors or by increasing the number of

intersecting sectors, which is achieved with the variation of the antennas’
directions and/or their communication ranges. In comparison with Lazos
and Poovendran (2005), the higher resolution in Lazos and Poovendran
(2006) comes at the price of increased computational complexity and
communication.

1.4.2.4 Probabilistic techniques

As explained in RSSI-based fingerprinting, probabilistic techniques estimate
the location as the one with the highest probabilities, using RSSI distributions
(mean and standard deviation) for the different beacons, thus considering
the variability of the RSSI values with time and environmental conditions
(Haeberlen et al. 2004; Youssef and Agrawala 2004).

1.4.2.5 Hop-count based methods

For ad hoc and isotropic networks (Niculescu and Nath 2003), nodes convert
hop-count from beacons of known locations into distance. Once the distance
to several beacons is obtained, the node’s location is estimated through tri-
lateration. The average distance per hop is calculated as:

∑ (x − x ) + ( y ) ( )
2 2 2
i j i − y j + zi − z j
i=1
di = N ,
∑h
j =1
j

where (xi, yi, zi) and (xj, yj, zj) represent the coordinates of different beacons,
and hj is the distance, in hops, from beacon j to beacon i. Niculescu and Nath
(2003) propose further variations of this method, working as an extension
of distance vector routing. In general, each node keeps a list of the beacon
nodes and its distances to them in number of hops. A similar approach is
also followed in Savarese et al. (2002). The main drawback of this technique
is that it only works for isotropic networks (same graph properties in all
directions).

1.4.2.6 Amorphous localization

If in addition to the hop distance estimations, neighbor information is
exchanged, the accuracy of the localization can be improved (He et al. 2003;
Bachrach et al. 2003). In particular, hop distance estimation can be obtained
through local averaging, with each node collecting its neighbors’ hop dis-
tance estimates in order to compute an average value.
Positioning Technologies in Location-Based Services 25

1.4.2.7 Main technologies using proximity for localization

1.4.2.7.1 Infrared
One of the pioneering localization systems to locate people in buildings,
“active badge” (Want et al. 1992), makes use of the transmission of IR signals
every 10 sec, which are detected by a reader. The location of the badge is
associated with the position of the reader that detected it. Consequently, the
precision is the size of the cell of the readers. Nevertheless, important draw-
backs of IR technologies for indoor localization are the possible interfer-
ences created by sunlight and fluorescent light, dead spots in some locations
(Mineno et al. 2005), short range (few meters), its line-of-sight requirement
(Sanpechuda and Kovavisaruch 2008), and its conception as a dedicated
system.

1.4.2.7.2 Radio frequency technologies

Multipath propagation, signal absorption, and interferences complicate the
process of distance estimation in indoor environments through RSSI, AoA,
or ToA. Consequently, many researchers avoid distance estimation and use
simple connectivity information for localization.
RFID has become very popular because of its compactness, low cost,
and reliability (Sanpechuda and Kovavisaruch 2008). Classic RFID-based
localization systems consist of a set of readers placed at known locations,
which will identify all the tags in their read range. Therefore, the preci-
sion corresponds to the cell size (read range) (Bouet and Pujolle 2008). An
RFID reader attached to a robot together with a set of tags deployed at
known positions in the area of interest can be used to estimate the robot’s
location by simple proximity principles, such as through the calculation of
the centroid of the tags that can be read. In a similar approach, Bouet and
Pujolle (2008) estimate a tag’s location, calculating the center of gravity of
the intersection of the coverage areas from readers that can detect the tag.
Interferences from nearby field generators can reduce the reliability of this
type of localization system. This vulnerability could be tackled through
algorithms aimed at eliminating interferences (Chieh et al. 2008).
Wi-Fi users can be localized by determining the access point where they are
logged in (Loschmidt et al. 2007). For example, “Google Latitude,” a recently
launched feature for localization (Google Latitude 2009), estimates locations
through cell identification; for this purpose, they are creating huge databases
to record Wi-Fi access points and cell towers around the world, acknowledg-
ing that the location estimation error equals the typical Wi-Fi access point
range (around 200 m). The resolution of this approach can improve in areas
with a dense concentration of access points, achieving precisions of around
25 m (LaMarca et al. 2005).
Bluetooth is a short-range technology (usually 10 m), making it very
useful for localization by simple cell identification (Barahim et al. 2007;
Thongthammachart and Olesen 2003). Nevertheless, due to the small
26 Location-Based Services Handbook

coverage area of the Bluetooth access points, a high density of them is

required, which could represent a drawback in terms of cost.
Cellular communications can also employ proximity-based techniques for
localization, and the most common ones are described as follows:

Cell identification: the mobile terminal’s location is estimated as the

location of the base station covering the cell. The main advantages
of this solution are its simplicity, low cost, low latency, and that it
works with all mobile terminals. Focusing on GSM as it is the most
popular standard in the world (GSM world 2009), base transceiver
stations (BTSs) regularly transmit on the BCCH information about
the location area identity (LAI) and cell identity (CI), which uniquely
identify GSM cells (Lo Piccolo et al. 2007). In a simple way, a cellular
phone can assume the BTS location as its location, enduring errors
in the range of the cell radius (typically from hundreds of meters in
urban areas up to 35 km in rural areas). This error constitutes the
main drawback of this technique; even for dense urban areas, cell
identification is not enough to achieve user satisfaction for many
LBSs and applications (Kunczier and Anegg 2004). Nevertheless,
the combination of cell ID with other techniques including the use
of timing advance (TA) or network measurement reports (Andrew
2009) leads to location estimations with better accuracy than cell
identification alone.
Cell identification in combination with other techniques: in GSM, TA rep-
resents the amount of time a mobile terminal has to advance data
transmission to compensate for the signal propagation delays due to
its distance from the BTS. The BTSs transmit the TA information via
the slow associated control channel (SACCH), and the mobile termi-
nal can use it to approximately locate itself in the arch centered at the
BTS and with a width of 554 m corresponding to each one of the 64
possible values of TA (the TA steps have a length equal to the GSM bit
period, and the values can be obtained from Lo Piccolo et al. [2007]).
A comparative analysis of combinations of cell identification with TA
and RSSI for urban and suburban scenarios can be found in Spirito
et al. (2001), showing that the average location errors are usually
above 200 m. More complicated techniques can lead to more accurate
resolutions; for example, the combination of cell identification with
round-trip-time measurements for UMTS technology can improve
location estimation accuracy to around 40 m (Borkowski et al. 2004).

1.4.3 Environment-based localization techniques

These methods focus mainly on observations of the environment in order
to detect some event related to pressure, light, or other features from which
Positioning Technologies in Location-Based Services 27

location can be easily inferred without the need to apply complicated and
error-prone measurements or geometric principles. Several authors have
already hinted at the need to distinguish this type of technique as a sepa-
rate group (Hightower and Borriello 2001; Kaiser et al. 2009; Abielmona and
Groza 2007). Moreover, Anjum and Mouchtaris (2007) show the need to dis-
tinguish between two main types of localization techniques: “measurement
based” and “observation based”, since the vulnerabilities of each type are
different. Examples of these environment-based techniques are listed as
follows:

Spotlight (Stoleru et al. 2005): this localization system uses spatio-

temporal properties of controlled light events to estimate loca-
tions. In particular, a central device distributes light events in the
area under study over a period of time, and the network nodes
record the times at which they detect those events. These recorded
time instants will be sent to the central device, which estimates the
locations of the nodes, making use of the received time sequences
and the known event distribution function. The localization can
be one-dimensional (the central device generates light events
along a line), two-dimensional (location point can be calculated
as the intersection of, for example, two perpendicular event lines
generated by lasers), or three-dimensional (the space in study is
divided in different areas, and light projectors will be used to gen-
erate different events for each area, thus helping to identify the
areas). Besides achieving a sub-meter accuracy, this localization
method does not require the addition of expensive hardware to
the network nodes. However, security features should be added
to the system in order to prevent nodes from spoofi ng their loca-
tions (e.g., transmitting time sequences corresponding to different
locations).
GPS localization broadcasting: the localization method proposed in
Stoleru et al. (2004) makes use of a GPS device carried by a vehicle
moving around the network and periodically broadcasting its posi-
tion; the network nodes in the proximity of the vehicle can infer
their location directly from the information broadcasted by the vehi-
cle. This is a simple and cost effective solution, specially intended
for wireless sensor networks. However, it assumes that the moving
vehicle is trusted, which could represent an important weakness in
terms of security.
Pressure sensors: the Smart Floor project from GaTech (Orr and
Abowd 2000) can be considered as a practical application for indoor
positioning based on footstep pressure detection. However, the
costly hardware requirements of this type of system represent the
main disadvantage (Varshavsky et al. 2007).
28 Location-Based Services Handbook

1.4.4 Multimode approach for localization

1.4.4.1 Introduction
Multimode localization solutions employ a combination of different tech-
niques (e.g., AoA, ToA, RSSI), technologies (e.g., Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, GPS), or
different system parameters (e.g., diversity of reference objects, frequency
diversity, spatial diversity) in order to obtain an accuracy and reliability in
the location information superior to that obtainable by each technique, tech-
nology, or system parameter without the use of diversity. Even if a priori,
multimode solutions employing different technologies and/or techniques
would not be feasible for low-end handsets unable to connect to more than
one technology or without the hardware enhancements required to apply
different techniques, these low-end devices could benefit from multimode
approaches making use of multiple-terminals based consistency to securely
determine a localization area whenever there are enough terminals; in
case there is not a large enough number of terminals, multiple-landmark
based techniques can also be used. Consequently, multimode should not
be restricted to localization technologies. The key idea is to use as many
degrees of diversity as possible to obtain and enhance the reliability and
consistency of the detection. In fact, diversity is commonly used to improve
the efficiency of wireless communications, and from the three main diversity
techniques utilized (space, frequency, and time), perhaps the most promising
one with the current state of the art of technology is spatial diversity, for the
following reasons.
There is a natural trend in wireless communications to use higher fre-
quencies. Most existing wireless communications technologies already
transmit at a few gigahertz (the free band in 2.4 GHz is typically used
by Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and ZigBee for example). Wimax will use even
higher frequencies (we can talk even about tens of GHz). This trend will
continue in the future. What does it mean in terms of spatial diversity?
Taking into account that in order to achieve proper spatial diversity the
antennas receiving the same signal need to be uncorrelated (which typi-
cally requires a minimum physical distance of around two wavelengths
between the antennas), then, the higher the frequency, the shorter the
wavelength, and consequently, the shorter the physical distance needed
to achieve uncorrelation between two antennas receiving the same sig-
nal. In other words, in the near future, because of the use of such high
frequencies, it will be feasible to have several antennas and use spatial
diversity within a portable device. Until now, spatial correlation was
mainly used only in the base station, where it was physically feasible to
place several antennas distant enough to be uncorrelated. Furthermore,
all 4G standards are considering multiple input multiple output (MIMO)
as one of their fundamental pillars, which will imply the use of several
antennas on both transmitter and receiver with the idea of leveraging
spatial diversity to improve the system’s efficiency. In conclusion, the use
Positioning Technologies in Location-Based Services 29

of spatial diversity to improve the characterization of the received sig-

nal and therefore increase the accuracy of the localization technique is
a promising idea for further research in the field of secure localization.
For example, spatial diversity achieved through mobile RFID readers to
improve localization accuracy has been proposed in Bouet and Pujolle
(2008). The use of time and frequency diversity would also be interesting
as further research guidelines (Ramachandran 2007).

1.4.4.2 Diversity of technologies

A practical example of the multimode approach can be found in the hybrid
positioning system (XPS) by Skyhook Wireless (Skyhook 2009), using Wi-Fi
access points, cellular communications towers, and GPS satellites to esti-
mate mobile terminals’ locations. XPS leverages the strengths of each tech-
nology, using Wi-Fi mainly for dense urban areas or indoor environments,
GPS for rural areas, and cellular towers as a complement in most locations,
achieving an overall accuracy of 10–20 m, with a start up time of around
150 ms. Moreover, XPS is intended to avoid the requirement for extra hard-
ware in the mobile terminals. Despite all these advantages, a rigorous secu-
rity analysis of previous versions of Skyhook positioning systems used on
Apple’s iPod touch and iPhone (Apple 2009), showed some vulnerabilities
to attacks based on signal insertions, replays, and jamming (Tippenhauer
et al. 2008). However, when both Wi-Fi and cellular towers segments are
considered working together, the magnitude of the errors brought by pos-
sible attacks decreases dramatically, and even if it could still be possible to
spoof the cellular communications towers and the GPS satellites at the same
time (Tippenhauer et al. 2008; Sastry et al. 2003), the probabilities are very
slim. In the same sense, we believe that the inclusion of additional technolo-
gies (apart from Wi-Fi, cellular, and GPS) in a multimode approach can help
enhance the security and improve the performance of localization systems.
For example, Sanpechuda and Kovavisaruch (2008) and Siddiqui (2004) pro-
pose the combination of RFID and WLAN localization to optimize reliabil-
ity, availability, and precision.

1.4.4.3 Diversity of localization techniques

Anjum and Mouchtaris (2007) indicate that approaches combining several
techniques resulting in robust secure localization deserve further research.
In the same sense, Chintalapudi et al. (2004) show the advantages of combin-
ing angulation with ranging, and also suggest that further research in this
area is needed. Subramanian et al. (2008) propose the combination of a prox-
imity-based approach and RSSI measurements in RFID localization systems,
showing a decrease in the average location estimation errors in comparison
with the application of each approach separately. Another promising combi-
nation is the use of AoA and ToA with UWB.
30 Location-Based Services Handbook

1.4.4.4 Diversity of reference objects: Multiple neighboring

terminals and cooperative localization
When the number of terminals in a region is large enough to ensure that an
individual device can connect with several terminals, the degree of security
in the location information can be dramatically enhanced, fulfilling the con-
dition that the independent observations from the different terminals match.
In case the number of terminals is not large enough to satisfy this condition,
a multimode approach can still be employed to enhance security, using mul-
tiple landmarks that the individual in question should be able to observe if
he/she really is at the claimed location. Next, some interesting approaches
for this kind of multimode operation will be described.
Within the context of position verification for vehicular ad hoc networks,
Leinmuller et al. (2006) propose the idea of making use of the nodes’ exist-
ing sensors to listen from neighboring nodes in order to detect maliciously
reported locations. The main advantage of this approach is the lack of require-
ment for extra hardware in the nodes or for a dedicated infrastructure of
Verifiers. A trust model is employed, whereby all the nodes store trust values
for their neighbors, and these values are recalculated with every observa-
tion. According to interaction between the nodes, two different models of
operation can be distinguished: autonomous and cooperative. Within the
autonomous model, the following factors can be used to help prevent attacks:

1. Range: nodes claiming to be at a distance larger than the communi-

cation range of typical radios will be discarded
2. Mobility threshold: nodes claiming to be at a distance larger than
the product of the time elapsed since the last interaction by a maxi-
mum speed, will be discarded
3. Map verification: nodes claiming to be at impossible locations will
be discarded
4. Overhearing packets addressed to different nodes, since this infor-
mation may reveal false claimed locations (Leinmuller et al. 2006)

The cooperative model relies on the exchange of information between the

nodes, which represents a drawback in terms of communication overhead.
However, its performance is better in comparison with the autonomous
model. Examples of cooperative communication between network nodes to
prevent location spoofing include:

1. Proactive exchange of neighbor tables, to check if the locations

stored in neighbors’ tables coincide with those in their own table. In
case several tables create doubt, a voting scheme with a threshold to
prevent false positives can be used to choose the location accepted
by the majority.
Positioning Technologies in Location-Based Services 31

2. Reactive position requests from a node to its neighbors, triggered the

first time it hears from a new node (the neighbors will act as accep-
tors or rejectors to the new node).

Lo Piccolo et al. (2007) present an example of the cooperative localization

approach for GSM based on RSS measurements. The goal is to estimate loca-
tions of mobile phones by exploiting the presence of neighboring phones
with known locations. In an initial phase, the mobile phones that can accu-
rately determine their locations (e.g., through GPS), communicate their posi-
tions to the network. In a second phase, the mobile phones whose locations
are unknown will collect RSS measurements from the previously located
phones in order to estimate their locations in three steps (Lo Piccolo et al.
2007):

• The BTS informs the unknown location mobile phones about the
presence of located nodes. To prevent privacy issues, the identifica-
tion of located mobile phones will only reveal data about the physi-
cal channels they are using.
• The unknown location mobile phones will perform power measure-
ments on the frequencies and time slots corresponding to the located
phones and transmit these values to the network.
• The network estimates the position of the unknown location mobile
phones through “propagation model-based” trilateration. In fact,
the network considers the located phones as beacons and the dis-
tance in between beacons and mobile phones of unknown locations
can be estimated through power measurements and propagation
models.

A similar strategy adapted to UMTS networks is described in Lo Piccolo

(2008).
Fox et al. (2000) introduce an example of multiple robots collaborating
together in order to reduce uncertainty in their localization. In particu-
lar, an improvement in accuracy is reported in comparison with the con-
ventional single Prover model. The authors even show that under certain
circumstances, successful localization is only possible if heterogeneous
Provers collaborate during the localization process. In addition, it is dem-
onstrated that it is not necessary to equip every Prover with a whole set of
technologies intended to obtain secure localization; actually, a cost reduc-
tion can be achieved by “sharing” the different technologies in a collab-
orative way among the Provers. In summary, collaboration among multiple
Provers can improve accuracy and reduce costs for secure localization in
comparison with the single Prover model, at the expense of an increase
in the communication overhead. Additional improvements in security and
accuracy could be achieved if the use of negative detections among Provers
32 Location-Based Services Handbook

is used; in particular, a peer Prover reporting a negative detection would

work as rejector for its surrounding area. Nevertheless, this approach and
its trade-off between performance improvement and the additional com-
putation and communication overheads should be considered in further
research (Fox et al. 2000).

1.5 Comparison and Outlook

Geometry-based localization methods make use of precise location infor-
mation from the network infrastructure beacons. These beacons are lever-
aged as landmarks or reference points of known locations, from which the
mobile terminal should be able to estimate distances or directions in order
to approximate its location through the application of geometric principles,
such as triangulation, trilateration, or multilateration.
Figure 1.2 gives an overview of the main magnitudes that can be employed
to obtain locations. Different functions can be used to estimate distances or

ToA
RF
fToA(d,ToA) Trilateration ( intersection of spheres)
Signals: US distance (d) location
IR
Laser
n RF, IR, Laser
n = d Where
ToA {
n US, Sound ≈ 340 m/s
TDoA
Same physical principle as ToA, but no synchronization is required between Receiver and Transmitters.
Uses multilateration (intersection of hyperboloids) instead of trilateration.
RSSI

fRSSI(d,Pr) Trilateration ( intersection of spheres)

Signals: [RF] distance (d) location

Pr = Pt l nG G
4pd t t

Fingerprinting (training + measurement)

location
AoA
fAoA (q,f) Triangulation
Signals: [RF] location
n
Pr = P t l G (q,f ) G (q,f )
4pd t r

FIGURE 1.2
Measured magnitudes and associated geometric principles to estimate locations.
Positioning Technologies in Location-Based Services 33

angles from the signals on which the localization system is based. In general,
distances can be estimated through the ToA, TDoA, or RSSI of different types
of signals originating from or arriving at reference beacons. Directions to ref-
erence beacons can be obtained through the estimation of the AoA of the
signals. As shown in Figure 1.2, the same principle can be applied to different
technologies and/or signals of different nature.
Figure 1.3 summarizes the set of technologies that use either range-
based or proximity-based location estimation methods. Table 1.1 also
provides a comparison of common technologies employed in LBBs for
localization.

1.6 Conclusions
We have reviewed a set of positioning technologies suitable for LBSs. Apart
from the most commonly known GPS, the users of new communication ser-
vices can benefit from a growing range of available technologies that can be
leveraged to provide location estimation, whenever some minimum hard-
ware requirements are met. Our survey covers the three geometry principles
that are considered fundamental for positioning technologies. We describe
the most representative set of location sensing technologies, including range-
based localization methods, proximity-based localization methods, and
environment-based location estimation methods. We also discuss the role of
multimode localization techniques. We argue that an increase in the number
of localization alternatives can further improve the accuracy of localization
and enhance the quality of service for a variety of LBSs.

ToA TDoA RSSI AoA Proximity & Others

RF Hyperbolic Navigation Systems Fingerprinting Computer Vision IR
UWB Decca GSM SLAM Active Badge
RFID Omega Wi-Fi RF using antenna arrays: RF
GPS Loran-C Radar Celluar communications RFID
Wi-Fi Wi-Fi Horus UWB Wi-Fi
DTV Cellular communications Compass Wimax Google Latitude
Cellular communications UTDoA Ekahau ... Bluetooth
Assisted GPS EOTD Bluetooth Cellular communications
AFLT Conventional Radio Cell ID
LIDAR DTV Cell ID + others
US Zigbee Inertial Navigation Systems
Active Bats
Cricket Wi-Fi
Dolphin Bluetooth Measured Magnitudes
Hexamite RFID Common Technologies or Systems
Sound SpotOn
Famous examples
Landmarc
Zigbee

FIGURE 1.3
Common technologies used in geometry-based localization.
TABLE 1.1
34

Comparison of common technologies employed for localization.

Technologies or Common
systems employed principles used Environment Power
for localization for localization Range suitability consumption Latency Precision Cost
UWB ToA, AoA 10–200 m Room, indoors High Very low Excellent (up to Expensive
millimeters) (systems in the
order of $20,000)
RFID RSSI theoretical 0.01–30 m Room, indoors Very low Low Good (meters) Very cheap (tags
propagation (especially in the order of
model, ToA, passive tags) cents)
Proximity
GPS ToA Thousands Rural and Very high Very high Good outdoors Costly
of urban with (meters). Poor infrastructure.
kilometers satellite indoors or in Moderate
visibility canyons receivers
Wi-Fi Proximity, RSSI 1–200 m Indoors, urban High Low Good (meters) Moderate
fingerprinting, with RSSI or
RSSI theoretical ToA/TDoA
propagation (with clock
model, ToA, enhancement).
TDoA But up to
hundreds of
meters with
Proximity
DTV ToA, RSSI Several Rural, High High Good (meters) Costly
fingerprinting kilometers semi-urban, outdoors and infrastructure.
(typically urban, indoors Moderate
tens) indoors receivers
Location-Based Services Handbook
Technologies or Common
systems employed principles used Environment Power
for localization for localization Range suitability consumption Latency Precision Cost
Cellular ToA, TDoA, RSSI From tens of Rural, Low Medium Good (meters) Expensive
communication fingerprinting, meters to semi-urban, with RSSI infrastructure.
AoA, Proximity tens of urban, fingerprinting Moderate
Cell ID, kilometers indoors for indoors. But receivers
Proximity Cell very poor (up
ID + others to kilometers)
with Cell ID
LIDAR ToA Variable Variable Medium Low Excellent (up to Moderate
depending depending millimeters)
on on
application application
US ToA From Room, indoors Very low Low Excellent Moderate
centimeters (centimeters) (dedicated
to tens of system)
meters
Sounds ToA From Room, indoors Very low Low Excellent Moderate
centimeters (centimeters) (dedicated
Positioning Technologies in Location-Based Services

to tens of system)
meters
Hyperbolic TDoA Usually Usually Medium Medium Poor (hundreds Gradually
navigation kilometers outdoors of meters) substituted by
systems GPS
Bluetooth RSSI 1–20 m Room, indoors Low Medium Good (meters) Cheap but high
fingerprinting, scalability costs
RSSI
propagation
model
35

(Continued)
Exploring the Variety of Random
Documents with Different Content
frightening about sitting alone in this ruined building with the wind
making its night sounds through the flying buttresses about her and
what appeared like the whole of Mars stretched out in panorama
before her.
It had looked desolate enough in the daylight. Now, with the stars
blazing an enigmatic backdrop, it looked dark—and twice as
desolate. Lynne found herself wondering what strange and fearsome
caravans, what hideous battles and frightful plagues, had passed
within view of her post. She seemed to see again the strange
capering figures of the murals and bas-reliefs, and of the vision-grid
she had viewed telepathically that afternoon in the distant hospital
room at New Samarkand.
She told herself she was getting the jams, sent a tune-up message
through to Cathayville. Though the telepathic operator should have
been on duty there was no response. She reached out further to
locate Revere, could not get to him, found Rolf. He told her, Lay off,
you marlet, Lynne. You nearly jammed the works this afternoon.
How is Revere? She was insistent.
In coma—and hereafter use the proper channels, Lynne. You're
supposed to key all messages for New Samarkand through
Cathayville.
Cathayville fails to answer, she informed him.
Cease sending at once! Cease sending at once, Lynne. If
Cathayville is out it means.... Cease sending at once!
What does if mean? Lynne was unused to Martian directness,
unused to taking peremptory orders, especially from a man. She had
no intention of obeying before she was good and ready and....
Suddenly they were there, all around her. Thanks to having viewed
the murals and the scene on the visual-grid that afternoon she was
able to get some idea of their nature—or what had been their nature
before a dying globe had driven them to seek the refuge of pure
thought and feeling-forms.
First one of them came fluttering into the room, like some giant
invisible moth, then came another and another and another until she
lost count. They were gay for some reason and nibbled at her mind
like moths nibbling at wool in a closet.
Worse, now that she had allowed them into her brain she was
unable to drive them out. They darted away, amused, just beyond
the reach of her questing probe. Then they came back, doing their
strange dances and whispering outrageous suggestions. Alien or not
they had definite erotic appeal, that awakened in Lynne responses
she had never before suspected she possessed.
What kind of creature am I? she thought hysterically after a
particularly ingenious lascivious mental embrace. And then, from
some hidden source, she drew the strength to fight. She
concentrated as never before in her life—even while working with the
group-machine—and little by little began to win the battle with the
aliens.
You'll regret it—just let us have the loan of your body and we'll show
you joys you have never dreamt of. The thoughts pounded at her
head with frail persistent powdery punches, that promised to win
through sheer weight of numbers what they lacked in power.
But Lynne forced herself to think of kindly prosaic Mother Weedon.
At once, seizing upon her thought, the invaders suggested all sorts
of indecent sports for that mature lady. And the very idea of Mother
Weedon indulging in such pursuits was so absurd that Lynne was
unable to resist laughing out loud.
At once the creatures were gone. They were unable to stand the
brain waves of ridicule. Lynne wondered about it. For the moment
she felt carried aloft on a wave of high excitement at her victory. She
tried to code through a message to Rolf Marcein through the proper
Cathayville channel.
Cathayville had been attacked earlier in the evening and for awhile
the telepath on duty had been forced to keep his mind resolutely
shut, lest he fall prey to the enemy. Repulsed, they had moved on to
Barkutburg and Lynne. She gave the message for relay, received
information to the effect that Rolf Marcein's current whereabouts
were unknown and that he was maintaining a closed mind to all
messages and was therefore not to be reached.
Lynne felt terribly alone at this message and the invaders chose that
moment, while her mind was still open, to return in greater force.
This time Lynne found herself in actual pain. Their promise was no
longer mere physical pleasure—although their abandonment of
bodies had unquestionably led them to overstress the joys of the
flesh. Now they promised pain unless Lynne were to give way to
them, the sort of pain, a thousand times magnified, that she had felt
sympathetically while Revere was enduring similar attack.
She tried to concentrate on Mother Weedon but the creatures were
not to be fooled twice by the same ruse. This time it was their
laughter that hurt. Lynne cast about wildly for help from any telepath
within mental reach, lest she actually surrender body and mind to
their control. She even tried to reach Lao Mei-O'Connell but the
Eurasian woman was not telepathic enough to respond to the
appeal.
Then, as she was about to give up, support reached her. Revere was
sending to her, helping her to steady herself. She could sense his
complete exhaustion, felt concern for him even while she accepted
gratefully his mental powers of assistance. Only such a relationship
as theirs, she realised, could cope with the blanketing torment of the
invaders.
He was telling her something, that Rolf and the others had compiled
some sort of error that afternoon from the vision-grid. The thought
ran, They think they know what the creatures are now but they don't.
Even I don't. My images were mixed. They are not the dominant
near-human species we thought but something else....
Slowly his thoughts faded once more, unable to hold out against the
fatigue that was plaguing him. But his hopeless message of defeat
had sprung a fresh thought-train in Lynne's mind, one that so
occupied her attention she was able to hold the invaders at bay
almost without effort.
She recalled the murals—the near-human looking dominants and
their pets with the disgusting dual bodies and vile games and many-
faceted eyes. She thought back to what Revere had just said via
thought-waves—They are not the dominant near-human species we
thought but something else....
She saw once more, in clear memory-vision, the telepathic picture
that had come to her of Rolf and Revere and the visual-grid. No
wonder the pictures had looked foggy and full of "ghosts." In his
mind's eye, limited by the fixed belief of Mars that only the dominant
species could have survived in invisible form, Revere had tried to
project these near-humans onto the screen.
Inwardly, subconsciously, he had known better. The dominant
species had not survived—on Mars at any rate. It was the horrid little
creatures with the multi-faceted eyes and the capuchin-like heads
and the dual bodies that had managed to shed their corporate
existence and still maintain life of a sort. The masters had gone—the
beasts remained....
Lynne felt a wave of delight at her discovery, realised it was more a
result of her not having been inhibited by the traditions of Martian
conditioning than through any genius of her own. For an instant she
let down the bars of her mind—and the invaders, hovering unseen
about her in the tower-room, came swarming in for their third and
fiercest attack. They knew she had guessed their nature, were
determined to prevent Lynne from making the discovery clear to
other humans. For they too were telepathic.

VIII
This time they actually knocked Lynne to the floor of the tower-room.
It was greater torment than she had ever endured in her life.
Somehow she could sense the pattern behind its intensity, even
while she was in the grip of a mental confusion that seemed to be
burning out the very fibers of her brain.
This was the showdown, the decisive battle. Her being imported to
Mars had been a step in the duel between the invisible aliens and
the Communications Integration of the red planet, headed by Rolf
Marcein and his telepaths and other department workers.
Unless the aliens were stopped and stopped now there would be no
holding them. Earthfolk on Mars were becoming increasingly
telepathic and telepaths were the prey of the invisible foes. Lynne
knew somehow, from the thoughts of the aliens, that they had been
growing steadily in strength since the arrival of the Earthmen on their
planet, that after a creepingly slow revival for decades they had
finally snow-balled to sufficient power to make open attacks upon
human brains laid bare for telepathic communication. They longed to
renew the lost pleasures of the flesh through possession of human
bodies.
Rolf and the scientists had learned something that afternoon from
Lynne's twin, something about the nature and life-form of the
attackers that had hitherto been concealed from them. They were
moving to the attack themselves—and it was of vital import to them
that Lynne should now get through with the message that would
reveal this true nature.
She tried desperately to reach Rolf—and when this effort failed to
think of Mother Weedon or even plump Tony Willis engaged in
amorous sports—but the keynote of the alien attack had been
altered from suggestion of sensation to outright mental attack.
Instead of bribery or blackmail through pain, she was being given
sledgehammer treatment.
But she had to get her message through. Without her knowledge of
the nature of the aliens Rolf would use faulty weapons against them,
would lose precious time, time that might prove decisive for the
survival of Earthmen on Mars.
Despairing, knowing she could not hold out much longer against the
attack with her mind open, Lynne summoned reserve powers she did
not know she possessed and swept the planet's surface with her
thoughts, seeking Rolf. Her love for him, her fear for Revere's
ultimate fate, her affection for her new comrades—all combined to
help her make a final superhuman effort.
Yet for awhile it seemed that even this despairing try was destined to
defeat. The floor was beginning to swim before her eyes when at last
she reached Rolf, got him, lost him, got him again. With darkness
closing about her she poured out her information, her theory, her
surmises.
Faintly at last she felt Rolf's Crehut! The multiple bodies on the
visual screen we thought were ghosts—of course they're the
survivors, rather than the near-humans! Thanks million, honey, we'll
know what to do now. Hold on out there—help is on its way.
But Lynne could hold out no longer. She felt the invisible attackers
come pouring through her weakened mental barriers—her last
remembered vision was of the floor rising rapidly to strike her. She
turned her face away just before it hit.
Lynne became aware of a lifting from her brain, of a cessation of
pain that she had never actually felt. She opened her eyes,
discovered she was still lying on the floor of the tower-room. But she
was no longer surrounded by terror.
The patched portion of the wall had been smashed through and
beyond it hovered the well-lighted outlines of a small aircraft. With
her in the room was Rolf Marcein—and he was sweeping the
apparently empty air about him with an odd-looking weapon. No
flash or beam came from its squat muzzle but briefly, all around her,
Lynne was aware of alien anguish, alien drainage, alien flight.
"That should do it for awhile, honey," he told her, helping her to her
unsteady feet. "Crehut! What a show those blasted marlets put on
this time. They tried to knock out the whole system simultaneously.
Check the other stations, will you, honey?"
Automatically she did it. Cathayville came in clearly, as did New
Walla Walla and Zuleika. Save for a few stations on the other side of
the planet the communications network was clear once again. Lynne
informed Rolf of the fact.
"Good," he said, pulling a skinless cigarette from his pocket and
letting it ignite itself. "I guess we're solid now. The purt of it is they
almost got us, before you could find out enough about them to knock
them out for awhile."
"What sort of gun is that?" Lynne asked him. He had called her
honey, he had saved her life, but so casually had he done it that she
still felt definite constraint between them.
"We had to put it together in a hurry, once we got your message," he
told her, patting it fondly. He held it up so that she could examine it
better, added, "It isn't really a gun at all. We've been using the
damned things for space and planet-ship external repairs for years
now—you know how their outer skins pile up positive electricity...."
"I don't," she said. "Tell me." He shook his head, put an arm around
her, scowled at her fiercely. "How come I managed to acquire such
an ignoramus?" he asked rhetorically. "I'm not going to explain it all
now but space-ships do pick up positive charges on their outer hulls
and this thing is an anion gun that attracts and discharges negative
juice.
"Our unseen visitors with the gone bodies are mostly positive
electricity in their present form, honey," he went on. "This blaster of
ours gives them a negative charge that wipes them right out." Rolf
put an arm about her, led her unprotesting to the hovering vehicle
outside. "I imagine they're beginning to wonder what in purt's been
going on, down below."
But before he pressed the buttons that lowered the hovering pinnace
to the planet's surface he drew her into the circle of his arms, kissed
her, then said, "If you hadn't given us the clue to what these horrors
were we'd never have had sense enough to know what to do. We
couldn't conceive of the dominant species turning into this kind of
force. But their pets, with the multiple bodies...."
Lynne and Lao Mei-O'Connell and most of the rest of the citizens of
Barkutburg listened attentively while Rolf told them the full story. The
trouble, it seemed, was caused by the fact that the Earthmen had
brought electricity back to Mars.
"These creatures were forced to discard their corporeal bodies to
survive on a planet as dead as this one," he went on. "Their food is
electricity and they'd been existing on a starvation diet for thousands
of years, until we got here."
"It's strange they never tried space-travel," said Lynne.
"I don't believe their philosophy admitted to such a materialistic
solution," Rolf replied. "They must have progressed like farb in the
spiritual direction to be able to discard their bodies at all. Probably
couldn't manage it both ways."
"That makes sense, Rolf." Lao nodded, looked at Rolf with an appeal
she could not put into words.
He understood, told her, "Your Revere is going to be right as purt. I
know what you must have thought when Lynne gave you the
message she got about what we were doing to him. I tried to conceal
it for that reason but this young lady is too farbly strong telepathically
to shut her out. I'm sorry I had to make him suffer but he understood.
And I wasn't going to damage him permanently.
"We—that is, some of Tony Willis' bright young men, have managed
to improve the necro-recorder so that it is no longer destructive of
the mind of the usee. They'd been working on it against time—and
against just such a situation as arose recently, when we were finally
able to get Revere off duty for a bit."
"Thanks." Lao Mei-O'Connell said the word gratefully.
"It's been rough on you," Rolf told her, "but nothing like as rough as if
our little friends got control of all the telepaths."
"What did they feed on that made them strong?" Lynne asked.
"Electricity," said Rolf. "Just because we couldn't make it work in
open circuits doesn't mean we haven't tried. They got enough from
our efforts partly to restore themselves—from such efforts and the
leakage of our closed circuits. They were always sopping it up.
"But we didn't even know what they looked like, though we had our
suspicions. They figured to be survivors of the dominant species on
the planet before it dried up—but Revere's test this afternoon gave
us our first doubts. We were still up a tree when Lynne got her
message through. That did it!
"But it was touch and go. I grabbed a space-ship to get to Lynne,
then took a pinnace. If we hadn't managed to get the anion guns
ready tonight I think we'd have been licked for all our knowledge.
Now we've got them licked. They can still raid our electricity once in
awhile, but it's going to cost them."
That was about it. Lynne got up and went outside in the chill Martian
night to smoke a skinless cigarette. A little while later Rolf came out
and joined her. He slipped an arm around her again, hugged her,
said, "Purt, isn't it?"
"I guess so." The constraint she felt in his presence was strong upon
her. And she had been through a little too much too quickly. She
said, "What about Revere?"
"He'll be back on the job in a little while," he said. "From what he told
me before he went under this afternoon he wants to mate up with
Lao Mei-O'Connell."
"That'll be fine," said Lynne, feeling suddenly very lonely. "But what
happens to me?"
"One zwirchy guess!" he said, bringing his other arm into play.
"But if you drive off the aliens, why are you going to need telepaths?"
She felt robbed of a fascinating new career before it was even
begun.
"Don't you believe it," he told her. "Telepathy is going to be the
keystone of the entire Martian culture. Now that we shan't have to
confine people like you and Revere and me to communications we
can use them a thousand other ways. Think of what telepathy will
mean in education, in therapy, in sheer honesty and understanding!
"Besides...." He looked thoughtfully at the star-studded sky. "Man
isn't always going to be limited to two puny planets. We've still to get
a settlement working on Venus. And out there somewhere are the
moons of Saturn and Jupiter. Think of how easy it will make the task
if we have telepaths ready-made!"
He paused, forced her to look at him, said, "How about it, honey?"
She said, "You must be in love with your own voice—you didn't really
have to say any of that. But watch what you think!"
 *** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK NIGHTMARE
TOWER ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in
these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it
in the United States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of
this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept
and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and
may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the
terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of
the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as
creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research.
Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given
away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with
eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject
to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
 PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free

distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or
any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree
to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be
bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from
the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in
paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be

used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people
who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a
few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic
works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.
See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with
Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in
the United States and you are located in the United States, we do
not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing,
performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the
work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of
course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™
mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely
sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name
associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of
this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its
attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without
charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the
United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms
of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying,
performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this
work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes
no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in
any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™
work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or
with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is
accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
 This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United
States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the
laws of the country where you are located before using this
eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived

from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a
notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright
holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the
United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must
comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted

with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted
with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of
this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a
part of this work or any other work associated with Project
Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this

electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you
provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work
in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in
the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing

access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that
s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
 copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and
discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project
Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™

electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe
and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating
the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may
be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to,
incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a
copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer
codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except

for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph
1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner
of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party
distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this
agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and
expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO
REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF
WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE
FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE
TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE
NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you

discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it,
you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by
sending a written explanation to the person you received the work
from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must
return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity
that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a
replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work
electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to
give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in
lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may
demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted
by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the
Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability,
costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or
indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur:
(a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b)
alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project
Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of

Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.
It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and
donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a
secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help,
see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,

Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can
be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the
widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small
donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax
exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating

charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and
keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in
locations where we have not received written confirmation of
compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of
compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where

we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebooknice.com