skip to main content
research-article

SCAN: Multi-Hop Calibration for Mobile Sensor Arrays

Published:30 June 2017Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Urban air pollution monitoring with mobile, portable, low-cost sensors has attracted increasing research interest for their wide spatial coverage and affordable expenses to the general public. However, low-cost air quality sensors not only drift over time but also suffer from cross-sensitivities and dependency on meteorological effects. Therefore calibration of measurements from low-cost sensors is indispensable to guarantee data accuracy and consistency to be fit for quantitative studies on air pollution. In this work we propose sensor array network calibration (SCAN), a multi-hop calibration technique for dependent low-cost sensors. SCAN is applicable to sets of co-located, heterogeneous sensors, known as sensor arrays, to compensate for cross-sensitivities and dependencies on meteorological influences. SCAN minimizes error accumulation over multiple hops of sensor arrays, which is unattainable with existing multi-hop calibration techniques. We formulate SCAN as a novel constrained least-squares regression and provide a closed-form expression of its regression parameters. We theoretically prove that SCAN is free from regression dilution even in presence of measurement noise. In-depth simulations demonstrate that SCAN outperforms various calibration techniques. Evaluations on two real-world low-cost air pollution sensor datasets comprising 66 million samples collected over three years show that SCAN yields 16% to 60% lower error than state-of-the-art calibration techniques.

References

  1. Alphasense. 2014. CO-B4 4-Electrode carbon monoxide sensor (datasheet). http://goo.gl/egp6Sm. (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Adrian Arfire, Ali Marjovi, and Alcherio Martinoli. 2016. Enhancing Measurement Quality through Active Sampling in Mobile Air Quality Monitoring Sensor Networks. In Proc. of AIM. IEEE, 1022--1027.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Adrian Arfire, Ali Marjovi, and Alcherio Martinoli. 2016. Mitigating Slow Dynamics of Low-Cost Chemical Sensors for Mobile Air Quality Monitoring Sensor Networks. In Proc. of EWSN. ACM, 159--167. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Sudipto Banerjee and Anindya Rov. 2014. Linear Algebra and Matrix Analysis for Statistics. Taylor 8 Francis Group.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. N. Barsan, D. Koziej, and U. Weimar. 2007. Metal oxide-based gas sensor research: How to? Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical 121, 1 (2007), 18 -- 35.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. R. Bro. 2003. Multivariate calibration What is in chemometrics for the analytical chemist? Analytica Chimica Acta 500 (2003), 185--194.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Matthias Budde, Rayan El Masri, Till Riedel, and Michael Beigl. 2013. Enabling Low-cost Particulate Matter Measurement for Participatory Sensing Scenarios. In Proc. of MUM. ACM, 19:1--19:10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Matthias Budde, Marcel Köpke, and Michael Beigl. 2015. Robust In-situ Data Reconstruction from Poisson Noise for Low-cost, Mobile, Non-expert Environmental Sensing. In Proc. of ISWC. ACM, 179--182. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Yaron Danon and Mark Embrechts. 1992. Least Squares Fitting Using Artificial Neural Networks. Intelligent Engineering Systems through Artificial Neural Networks 2 (1992).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Norman Draper and Yonghong Yang. 1997. Generalization of the Geometric Mean Functional Relationship. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis 23, 3 (1997), 355--372. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. W. Eugster and G. W. Kling. 2012. Performance of a low-cost methane sensor for ambient concentration measurements in preliminary studies. Atmospheric Measurement Techniques 5, 8 (2012), 1925--1934.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Chris Frost and Simon G. Thompson. 2000. Correcting for regression dilution bias: comparison of methods for a single predictor variable. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A 163, 2 (2000), 173--189.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Kaibo Fu, Wei Ren, and Wei Dong. 2017. Multihop Calibration for Mobile Sensing: k-hop Calibratability and Reference Sensor Deployment. In Proc. of INFOCOM. IEEE.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Gene H. Golub and Charles F. Van Loan. 1980. An Analysis of the Total Least Squares Problem. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 17, 6 (1980), 883--893. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2156807Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. David Hasenfratz, Olga Saukh, and Lothar Thiele. 2012. On-the-fly calibration of low-cost gas sensors. In Proc. of EWSN. ACM, 228--244. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. W. Jiao, G. Hagler, R. Williams, R. Sharpe, R. Brown, D. Garver, R. Judge, M. Caudill, J. Rickard, M. Davis, L. Weinstock, S. Zimmer-Dauphinee, and K. Buckley. 2016. Community Air Sensor Network (CAIRSENSE) project: evaluation of low-cost sensor performance in a suburban environment in the southeastern United States. Atmospheric Measurement Techniques 9, 11 (2016), 5281--5292.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Henry D. Kahn. 1973. Note On The Distribution of Air Pollutants. Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association 23, 11 (1973), 973--973.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Sunyoung Kim, Eric Paulos, and Mark D. Gross. 2010. WearAir: Expressive T-shirts for Air Quality Sensing. In Proc. of TEI. ACM, 295--296. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Jason Jingshi Li, Boi Faltings, Olga Saukh, David Hasenfratz, and Jan Beutel. 2012. Sensing the Air We Breathe -- The OpenSense Zurich Dataset. In Proc. of AAAI. AAAI, 323--325. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Balz Maag, Olga Saukh, David Hasenfratz, and Lothar Thiele. 2016. Pre-Deployment Testing, Augmentation and Calibration of Cross-Sensitive Sensors. In Proc. of EWSN. ACM, 169--180. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Jan F. Markert, Matthias Budde, Gregor Schindler, Markus Klug, and Michael Beigl. 2016. Private Rendezvous-based Calibration of Low-Cost Sensors for Participatory Environmental Sensing. In Proc. of Urb-IoT. ACM, 82--85. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Emiliano Miluzzo, Nicholas D. Lane, Andrew T. Campbell, and Reza Olfati-Saber. 2008. CaliBree: A Self-calibration System for Mobile Sensor Networks. In Proc. of DCOSS. IEEE, 314--331. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Luis Sánchez, Verónica Gutiérrez, Jose Antonio Galache, Pablo Sotres, Juan Ramón Santana, Javier Casanueva, and Luis Muñoz. 2013. SmartSantander: Experimentation and service provision in the smart city. In Proc. of WPMC. IEEE, 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Olga Saukh, David Hasenfratz, and Lothar Thiele. 2015. Reducing Multi-Hop Calibration Errors in Large-Scale Mobile Sensor Networks. In Proc. of IPSN. ACM/IEEE, 274--285. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Olga Saukh, David Hasenfratz, Christoph Walser, and Lothar Thiele. 2013. On Rendezvous in Mobile Sensing Networks. In Proc. of RealWSN. Springer, 29--42.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Peter H. Schönemann. 1966. A generalized solution of the orthogonal procrustes problem. Psychometrika 31, 1 (1966), 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Sensirion AG. 2016. SHTC1 Humidity and Temperature Sensor IC (datasheet). https://goo.gl/boJh2T. (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. SGX Sensortech. 2014. MiCS-OZ-47 ozone sensor (datasheet). http://goo.gl/C49tcw. (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Laurent Spinelle, Michel Gerboles, Maria Gabriella Villani, Manuel Aleixandre, and Fausto Bonavitacola. 2015. Field calibration of a cluster of low-cost available sensors for air quality monitoring. Part A: Ozone and nitrogen dioxide. Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical 215 (2015), 249 -- 257.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Yele Sun, Guoshun Zhuang, Ying Wang, Lihui Han, Jinghua Guo, Mo Dan, Wenjie Zhang, Zifa Wang, and Zhengping Hao. 2004. The air-borne particulate pollution in Beijing — concentration, composition, distribution and sources. Atmospheric Environment 38, 35 (2004), 5991 -- 6004.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Rundong Tian, Christine Dierk, Christopher Myers, and Eric Paulos. 2016. MyPart: Personal, Portable, Accurate, Airborne Particle Counting. In Proc. of CHI. ACM, 1338--1348. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Chris Tofallis. 2002. Model Fitting for Multiple Variables by Minimising the Geometric Mean Deviation. In Total Least Squares and Errors-In-Variables Modeling: Algorithms, Analysis And Applications.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. E. B. Woolley. 1941. The method of minimized areas as a basis for correlation analysis. Econometrica 9(1) (1941), 38--62.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Haibo Ye, Tao Gu, Xianping Tao, and Jian Lu. 2014. SBC: Scalable Smartphone Barometer Calibration Through Crowdsourcing. In Proc. of MobiQuitous. Springer, 60--69. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Yan Zhuang, Feng Lin, Eun-Hye Yoo, and Wenyao Xu. 2015. AirSense: A Portable Context-sensing Device for Personal Air Quality Monitoring. In Proc. of MobileHealth. ACM, 17--22. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. SCAN: Multi-Hop Calibration for Mobile Sensor Arrays

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      • Published in

        cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies
        Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies  Volume 1, Issue 2
        June 2017
        665 pages
        EISSN:2474-9567
        DOI:10.1145/3120957
        Issue’s Table of Contents

        Copyright © 2017 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 30 June 2017
        • Accepted: 1 May 2017
        • Revised: 1 March 2017
        • Received: 1 February 2017
        Published in imwut Volume 1, Issue 2

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader