Real-life test of indoor positioning & proximity technologies
RESULTS NOW AVAILABLE!
The 2nd edition of the Geo IoT World Indoor Location Testbed evaluated five solutions. They all beat the previously established industry norms in all metrics of performance.
The report combining 2016 and 2017 results is now available.
Held on June 8, 2017, the second Geo IoT World Indoor Location Testbed assessed the leading solutions in indoor positioning, wayfinding and other advanced proximity features.
Managed by the indoor location expert Grizzly Analytics, the 2017 testbed goes well beyond a pure positioning accuracy trial in order to match real-life requirements of location-based applications. Performance metrics include real-time accuracy, accuracy after stabilization, time to stabilization, consistency, setup time, infrastructure required, time to first fix, floor detection, proximity detection, and more.
The 2017 testbed evaluated five solutions. One based on BLE tags, four on smartphones. One smartphone solution runs infrastructure-free, one incorporates camera-based image processing, and two blend BLE beacons with motion sensing.
For the second year, indoor location solutions are beating the previously established industry norms in all metrics of performance : solutions evaluated this year achieved below 2 meter accuracy, in smartphone and in tag tracking, both with BLE beacons and infrastructure-free. Solutions deployed in under one hour setup. Solutions detected floor changes and maintained positioning accuracy while moving on stairs. Solutions achieved fast first location fixes within seconds of starting.
The testbed evaluation shows in particular that :
– BlooLoc‘s tag-based solution achieves real-time accuracy better than 2 meters, and accuracy after stabilization under 1.5 meters
– GipsTech‘s infrastructure-free solution also achieves accuracy of under 2 meters
– Accuware‘s solution required less than one hour setup time, drastically less than others. Performance of these and other solutions are detailed in this report below.
A new reference Industry report
The two editions of the Indoor Location Testbed have evaluated 12 solutions from 9 companies. More than a competition for scores, this testbed series details how market-leading companies are drastically outperforming the industry norms from only three years ago. Consistent accuracy better than two meters, setup in under one hour, high accuracy without beacons, fast initial location fixes, and more, are all achievements that seemed unattainable, but are now being reached by multiple testbed participants in real-world conditions.
To read more about this report, or to purchase it on-line, click here
The 2017 Testbed full specifications can be dowloaded here
A testbed conducted by Dr. Bruce Krulwich, Founder, Grizzly Analytics
Grizzly Analytics provides technology-focused analysis, intelligence and consulting in the mobile and other industries, with a particular focus on indoor location technology and Internet of Things. The first Grizzly Analytics report on indoor location positioning technologies was released in 2011, and the most recent report covers over 150 companies. Grizzly is unique in its focus on technology, analyzing each technology’s uniqueness, differentiation, benefits and implications.
Bruce founded Grizzly Analytics after a long career in technology innovation, including five years building a technology-oriented competitive intelligence team within Samsung. Grizzly Analytics customers include almost every major company in the mobile, software and electronics industries, as well as many smaller companies and start-ups.
Held on May 26, 2016, the Geo IoT World Indoor Location Testbed was managed by Grizzly Analytics.
The Testbed evaluated ten solutions from eight companies crossing the spectrum of indoor location: BlooLoc (phone and tag solutions), GipsTech, HERE (Bluetooth and Wi-Fi solutions), Indoo.rs, Lambda4, Movin, NexToMe and Senion. Most run on smartphones, but some use dedicated hardware. Many use beacons, but some are infrastructure-free or use signals of opportunity.
– Four best performers are distinguished: two solutions were the top performers in the phone-based segment, one solution in the infrastructure-free segment and one solution in the dedicated hardware segment.
– Solutions delivered accuracy better than 4 meters after stabilization
– Several delivered accuracy below 2 meters
– Strength of the infrastructure-free segment, often thought to deliver much worse performance than beacon-based solutions
– Strength of SLAM and SLAM-like technologies