## Time	
  to	
  timestamp:	
  opportunistic	
  cooperative	
  localization from	
  reception	
  time	
  measurements

Fabio	
  Ricciato

Austrian	
  Institute	
  of	
  Technology

## Abstract

We	
   present	
   a	
   general	
   framework	
   for	
   improving	
   and	
   extending	
   GNSS-­-based	
   positioning	
   by leveraging	
   opportunistic	
   measurements	
   from	
   legacy	
   terrestrial	
   radio	
   signals.	
   The	
   proposed approach	
   requires	
   only	
   that	
   participating	
   nodes	
   collect	
   and	
   share reception	
   timestamps of incoming	
  packets	
  and/or	
  other	
  reference	
  signals	
  transmitted	
  by	
  other	
  fixed	
  or	
  mobile	
  nodes, with	
   no need	
   of inter-­-node	
   synchronization.	
   The	
   envisioned	
   scheme	
   couples	
   the	
   idea	
   of cooperative	
   GNSS	
   augmentation	
   with	
   recent	
   pioneering	
   work	
   in	
   the	
   field	
   of	
   time-­-based localization	
   in	
   asynchronous	
   networks.	
   In	
   this	
   contribution	
   we	
   present	
   the	
   fundamental principles	
   of the proposed	
   approach	
   and	
   discuss	
   the	
   system-­-level	
   aspects	
   that	
   make	
   it particularly	
  appealing	
  and	
  timely	
  for	
  Cooperative	
  ITS	
  applications,	
  with	
  the	
  goal	
  of	
  motivating further	
  research	
  and	
  experimentation	
  in	
  this	
  direction.

## 1. Introduction	
  &amp;	
  motivations

In this paper	
   we	
   present	
   a	
   framework	
   approach	
   to	
   integrate	
   Global	
   Navigation	
   Satellite Systems	
  (GNSS)	
  and	
  legacy	
  terrestrial	
  wireless	
  networks	
  (short-­-range	
  and/or	
  long-­-range)	
  in order	
   to (1) improve	
   the	
   localization	
   accuracy	
   for	
   nodes	
   equipped	
   with	
   on-­-board	
   GNSS receiver	
   and	
   (2)	
   extend	
   the	
   localization	
   function	
   to	
   wireless	
   nodes	
   outside	
   GNSS	
   coverage and/or	
  without	
  onboard	
  GNSS	
  module.	
  The	
  proposed	
  approach	
  is	
  'opportunistic'	
  since	
  it	
  may exploit	
   legacy	
   wireless	
   communication	
   signals	
   from	
   fixed	
   infrastructure	
   and/or	
   between cooperating	
   mobile	
   nodes,	
   and	
   is particularly	
   appealing	
   for applications	
   in the field of Cooperative	
   Intelligent	
   Transportation	
   Systems	
   (C-­-ITS).	
   Our	
   approach	
   builds	
   upon	
   recent work	
   in	
   the	
   field	
   of	
   time-­-based	
   localization	
   in	
   asynchronous	
   network	
   [Nag11,Col14,Fac14], whose	
  principles	
  are	
   briefly	
   presented	
   hereafter,	
   combined	
   with	
   the	
   concept	
   of	
   cooperative positioning	
   [Gar12,Ami14].	
  The	
   requirements	
   for	
   practical	
   implementation	
   are	
   minimal:	
   we demand	
  only	
  that	
  the	
  participating	
  devices	
  are	
  capable	
  of	
  recording	
  reception	
  timestamps	
  for legacy	
  communication	
  signals,	
  and	
  that	
  have	
  the	
  means	
  to	
  share	
  these	
  data	
  along	
  with	
  their initial	
  position	
  (if	
  available)	
  as	
  provided	
  by	
  GNSS.

In	
   this	
   work	
   we	
   do	
   not	
   provide	
   a	
   single	
   ready-­-made	
   solution	
   for	
   a	
   specific	
   scenario	
   or	
   use-­case,	
  but	
  rather	
  describe	
  a	
  more	
  general	
  reference	
  framework	
  and	
  the	
  underlying	
  principles of	
  the	
  proposed	
  solution	
  space.	
  Our	
  goal	
  is	
  twofold.	
  On	
  the	
  side	
  of	
  the	
  research	
  community,	
  we indicate a coherent research agenda aimed at attracting attention onto the (mostly unexplored	
   to	
   date)	
   field	
   of	
   opportunistic	
   and	
   cooperative time-­-based localization	
   between asynchronous nodes, highlighting some prominent directions for investigation and experimentation.	
   On	
   the	
   side	
   of	
   the	
   industry,	
   we	
   aim	
   at	
   drawing	
   attention	
   on	
   the	
   potential value	
   (in	
   terms	
   of	
   costs	
   vs.	
   benefits)	
   of	
   supporting	
   more	
   accurate	
   timing	
   measurement	
   in commercial-­-off-­-the-­-shelf	
   (COTS)	
   receivers	
   for	
   terrestrial	
   communication,	
   and	
   making	
   these measurements	
   available	
   via	
   standard	
   interfaces	
   to	
   system	
   integrators.	
   In	
   other	
   words,	
   we envision	
   the	
   future	
   'commoditization'	
   of	
   precise	
   receiver	
   timestamping	
   function	
   in	
   COTS

devices,	
  similarly	
  to	
  what	
  has	
  happened	
  for	
  the	
  Received	
  Signal	
  Strength	
  Indicator	
  (RSSI),	
  in order	
  to	
  unlock	
  the	
  potential	
  of	
  opportunistic	
  time-­-based	
  multi-­-radio	
  localization.

The	
  paper	
  is	
  organized	
  as	
  follows.	
  We	
  start	
  in	
  Sec.	
  2	
  by	
  representing	
  some	
  fundamental	
  trends in	
   wireless	
  systems	
  technology	
  that	
  collectively	
  motivate	
  the	
  appeal,	
  timeliness	
  and	
  practical viability	
   of	
   the	
   proposed	
   method	
   for	
   real-­-world	
   adoption.	
   In	
   Sec.	
   3	
   we	
   describe	
   in	
   a	
   tutorial manner	
   the	
   fundamental	
   principles	
   of	
   time-­-based	
   localization	
   in	
   asynchronous	
   networks. Along	
   the	
   way,	
   we	
   review	
   relevant	
   pioneering	
   work	
   and	
   highlight	
   a	
   number	
   of	
   relevant research	
   directions	
   for	
   the	
   scientific	
   community.	
   Finally,	
   in	
   Sec.	
   4	
   we	
   conclude	
   with	
   some simple	
  recommendations	
  for	
  industry	
  players.

## 2. Current	
  trends

## Trend	
  1:	
  Radios	
  coming	
  together

Generally	
  speaking,	
  radio	
  signals	
  can	
  be	
  used	
  to	
  perform	
  different	
  functions:	
  communication, localization	
   and navigation,	
   sensing	
   and	
   imaging,	
   to name	
   the most popular	
   nowadays. Historically,	
  the	
  vast	
  majority	
  of	
  radio	
  technologies	
  are	
  designed	
  to	
  serve	
  only	
  one	
  function, e.g. communication or localization.	
   Dedicated	
   single-­-function	
   radio	
   systems	
   are	
   easier	
   to design	
   and	
   allow	
   optimizing	
   each	
   component	
   (signal	
   format,	
   protocol,	
   device	
   etc.)	
   for	
   the function	
  of	
  interest.	
  However,	
  real-­-world	
  applications	
  and	
  use-­-cases	
  often	
  involve	
  a	
  blend	
  of multiple functions, for example communication and localization. The current dominant paradigm	
   is	
   to	
   use	
   multiple	
   single-­-function	
   systems:	
   for	
   example	
   in	
   the	
   field	
   of	
   C-­-ITS	
   one common	
  option	
  is	
  to	
  rely	
   on	
   a	
   GNSS	
   module	
   for	
   localization,	
   to	
   DSRC/IEEE	
   802.11p	
   module for	
   local-­-area	
   communication,	
   and	
   to	
   a	
   UMTS/LTE	
   module	
   for	
   wide-­-area	
   communication.	
   In this	
   way,	
   multiple	
   radio	
   modules	
   developed	
   independently	
   for	
   different	
   functions	
   end	
   up together,	
  co-­-located	
  in	
  the	
  same	
  On-­-Board	
  Unit	
  (OBU).	
  Similar	
  considerations	
  can	
  be	
  done	
  for smartphones.	
   Given	
   this	
   scenario,	
   it	
   is	
   quite	
   natural	
   to	
   ask	
   whether	
   some	
   form	
   of	
   tighter integration	
   or	
   inter-­-working	
   between	
   these	
   modules	
   could	
   be	
   exploited	
   to	
   improve	
   the overall	
  system	
  performance.	
  As	
  we	
  will	
  show	
  hereafter,	
  the	
  answer	
  is	
  positive	
  (at	
  least)	
  as	
  far as the positioning	
   accuracy	
   is concerned,	
   meaning	
   that	
   there	
   is a (mostly	
   unexplored) potential	
  to	
  improve	
  the	
  positioning	
  accuracy	
  through	
  clever	
  interworking	
  of	
  these	
  different systems.

## Trend	
  2:	
  Reusing	
  Radios

It	
   is	
   possible	
   that	
   in	
   the	
   mid-­-term	
   future	
   we	
   will	
   see	
   a	
   proliferation	
   of	
   wireless	
   technologies designed	
  natively	
  to	
  support	
  multiple	
  functions.	
  One	
  example	
  in	
  this	
  direction	
  is	
  given	
  by	
  the Ultra Wide Band (UWB) technology wherein the signal format, protocol and device architecture have been designed and standardized from the beginning to serve both communication	
  and	
   ranging	
   functions.	
   In	
   principle,	
   in	
   C-­-ITS	
   applications	
   one	
   could	
   develop systems	
   that	
   use	
   a	
   single	
   waveform	
   to	
   let	
   the	
   vehicle	
   sense	
   and	
   communicate	
   with	
   other vehicles.	
   However,	
   along	
   the	
   path	
   from	
   (current)	
   single-­-function	
   systems	
   towards	
   (future) multi-­-function	
  systems	
  there	
  are	
  opportunities	
  to	
  reuse	
  'opportunistically'	
  systems	
  that	
  were developed	
  for	
  some	
  'native'	
  function	
  X	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  perform	
  also	
  a	
  different	
  'supplementary' function	
   Y.	
   For	
   example,	
   certain	
   opportunistic	
   radars	
   (also	
   called	
   'green	
   radars')	
   exploit legacy signals from existing broadcasting towers. Of particular interest for practical applications	
  are	
  those	
  cases	
  where	
  the	
  supplementary	
  function	
  Y	
  can	
  be	
  performed	
  with	
  small or	
   null	
   adaptation	
  of	
  the	
  legacy	
  devices,	
  therefore	
  at	
  (almost)	
  zero	
  additional	
  cost.	
  The	
  most popular example is probably represented by radio localization methods based on the Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI) in WiFi, Bluethoot, IEEE 802.15.4 and other wireless	
   systems:	
   strictly	
   speaking,	
   RSSI	
   is	
   not	
   required	
   to	
   perform	
   the	
   native	
   function	
   of these systems, i.e., communication.	
   Nevertheless, RSSI is now a 'commodity'	
   function supported	
  by	
  most	
  (if	
  not	
  all)	
  commercial	
  devices,	
  and	
  that	
  has	
  enabled	
  the	
  implementation	
  of coarse localization	
   capabilities	
   in	
   these	
   systems.	
   Along	
   a	
   similar	
   line	
   of	
   reasoning,	
   we	
   claim here	
  that	
  timing	
  measurements	
  on	
  the	
  receiver	
  side,	
  i.e.,	
  accurate	
  timestamping,	
  is	
  a	
  small	
  but powerful	
  ingredient	
  holding	
  the	
  potential	
  to	
  introduce	
  more	
  accurate	
  localization	
  capabilities especially	
  in	
  multi-­-radio	
  nodes	
  (for	
  instance	
  smartphones	
  and	
  OBUs)	
  without	
  requiring	
  clock synchronization	
  between	
  them.

## Trend	
  3:	
  Cooperation

Before turning of the century the dominant paradigm for mobile radio systems was asymmetric and vertical: it would involve mobile end-­-terminals 'served' by fixed infrastructure	
   nodes	
   with	
   different	
   capabilities.	
   This	
   model	
   reflects	
   the	
   asymmetry	
   of	
   the traditional service-­-provisioning	
  model ,	
  wherein	
  provider	
  and	
  consumer	
  are	
  distinct	
  entities.	
  In the	
   last	
   decade	
   however,	
   the	
   peer-­-to-­-peer	
   paradigm	
   has	
   made	
   his	
   way,	
   first	
   in	
   computer applications	
  and	
  then	
  in	
  the	
  real	
  of	
  wireless	
  communications.	
  Systems	
  based	
  on	
  the	
  horizontal cooperation	
   between	
   peer	
   nodes	
   that collectively	
  build	
  the	
  service have	
   been	
   developed	
   and accepted.	
   In	
   many	
   scenarios,	
   and	
   prominently	
   in	
   the	
   C-­-ITS	
   field,	
   hybrid	
   radio	
   systems	
   are envisaged	
   to	
   include	
   a	
   combination	
   of	
   horizontal	
   and	
   vertical	
   components,	
   i.e.,	
   vehicle-­-to-­vehicle	
  (V2V)	
  and	
  vehicle-­-to-­-infrastructure	
  (V2I).	
  The	
  application	
  of	
  the	
  peer-­-to-­-peer	
  concept for	
  GNSS	
  augmentation	
  has	
  been	
  proposed	
  earlier	
  in	
  [Gar12]	
  (see	
  also	
  [Ami14]	
  and	
  references therein) where it was shown that the fusion of initial GNSS positions and ranging measurements between	
  the	
   nodes	
   bears	
   the	
   potential	
   to improve the	
   position	
   estimates	
   (for GNSS-­-enabled	
   nodes)	
   and	
   at	
   the	
   same	
   time extend the	
   localization	
   function	
   to	
   non-­-GNSS-­enabled	
   nodes.	
   However,	
   the	
   system	
   model	
   considered	
   in	
   those	
   papers	
   assumes	
   that nodes are	
   equipped	
   with	
   additional	
   ranging	
   capabilities . The	
   latter	
   can	
   be	
   delivered	
   by	
   external dedicated	
   sensors,	
   e.g. radar, or by implementing	
   dedicated	
   ranging	
   procedures	
   on	
   the wireless	
  communication	
  channel,	
  e.g.	
  two-­-way	
  Time-­-of-­-Arrival.	
  Instead,	
  we	
  are	
  interested	
  in methods	
   that	
   reuse	
   the	
   existing	
   communication	
   signals	
   that	
   are	
   anyway	
   available	
   over-­-the-­air, without	
   requiring	
   additional	
   sensors,	
   protocols	
   or	
   signals. In principle, this can be achieved	
  by	
  resorting	
  to	
  RSSI-­-based	
  methods	
  from	
  received power measurements	
  associated to	
   the	
   communication	
   signals,	
   but	
   this	
   approach	
   is	
   known	
   to	
   be	
   very	
   inaccurate	
   in	
   practice and	
  would	
  unlikely	
  provide	
  any	
  accuracy	
  gain	
  over	
  plain	
  GNSS	
  technology	
  in	
  real	
  scenarios.	
  In this contribution we claim that cooperative (and opportunistic) localization can be implemented	
   from timing measurements,	
   by	
   exploiting	
   simply the receiver timestamps recorded	
   by	
   (legacy)	
   receivers	
   on	
   the	
   communication	
   signals	
   and	
   packets	
   transmitted	
   from other	
  mobile	
  and/or	
  fixed	
  nodes.	
  In	
  our	
  scheme,	
  a	
  set	
  of	
  timestamps	
  from	
  multiple	
  nodes	
  are transformed	
   into	
   a	
   set	
   of	
   pseudo-­-ranges,	
   and	
   the	
   latter	
   are	
   fused	
   with	
   initial	
   positions	
   to improve	
   and	
   extend	
   the	
   localization	
   function	
   without	
   any	
   need	
   of	
   additional	
   equipment, protocol	
  or	
  signal	
  for	
  ranging.	
  The	
  overall	
  dataflow	
  is	
  sketched	
  in	
  Fig.	
  1.

## 3. System	
  model	
  and	
  methodology	
  framework

## Reference	
  Scenario

We	
   envisage	
   a	
   cooperative	
   and	
   opportunistic	
   localization	
   system	
   where	
   a	
   subset	
   of	
   the participating	
  nodes	
  know	
  their	
  position	
  with	
  a	
  certain	
  initial	
  accuracy,	
  not	
  necessarily	
  equal for all nodes,	
   from	
   their	
   on-­-board	
   GNSS	
   module.	
   Furthermore,	
   each	
   node	
   communicates wireless	
  with	
  other	
  mobile	
  nodes	
  and/or	
  with	
  infrastructure	
  nodes,	
  for	
  other	
  purposes	
  than localization.	
  We	
  show	
  that	
  such	
  communication	
  signals	
  can	
  be	
  exploited	
  opportunistically	
  to collectively	
   improve	
   the	
   localization	
   accuracy	
   of	
   the	
   nodes.	
   To	
   achieve	
   this	
   goal,	
   it	
   is	
   only required	
  that	
  each	
  node	
  is	
  able	
  to	
  measure	
  the	
  reception	
  time	
  of	
  individual	
  packets	
  (in	
  case	
  of packet-­-oriented	
  protocols)	
  or	
  some	
  commonly	
  agreed	
  reference	
  signals	
  (in	
  case	
  of	
  continuous transmissions,	
  e.g.	
  frame	
  start	
  in	
  DVB-­-T)	
  according	
  to	
  its	
  local	
  clock,	
  and	
  that	
  it	
  is	
  able	
  to	
  share with	
  the	
  rest	
   of	
   the	
   system	
   the	
   recorded	
  reception	
  timestamps,	
  the	
  associated	
  packet/signal identifiers	
  and	
  its	
  initial	
  position	
  estimate	
  (if	
  available).	
  No	
  external	
  mechanism	
  is	
  required	
  to synchronize	
  the	
   clock	
   of	
   the	
   individual	
   receivers,	
   i.e.,	
   we	
   consider asynchronous	
  nodes . Also, we	
  do	
  not	
  make	
  any	
  assumption	
  on	
  the	
  transmission	
  time	
  of	
  every	
  packet	
  or	
  reference	
  signal, which	
   we	
   assume	
   uncontrolled	
   and	
   unknown.	
   In	
   this	
   way,	
   we	
   can	
   cope	
   with asynchronous transmissions . In fact, most data protocols	
   are indeed	
   completely	
   asynchronous,	
   and	
   in standard	
   COTS	
   devices	
   transmission	
   timestamps	
   (if	
   at	
   all	
   available)	
   are	
   less	
   accurate	
   than reception	
   timestamps.	
  However,	
  it	
   is	
   quite	
   straightforward	
   to	
   extend	
   the	
   method	
   presented here	
   to	
   make	
   use	
   of	
   any	
   additional	
   information	
   that	
   might	
   be	
   available	
   on	
   the	
   transmission times	
   (e.g.	
   in	
   case	
   of	
   periodic	
   transmissions).	
   Also,	
   for	
   the	
   sake	
   of	
   simplicity	
   we	
   consider	
   a basic	
  scenario	
  where	
  all	
  measured	
  data	
  are	
  somehow	
  gathered	
  at	
  a	
  centralized	
  entity	
  (server or	
   cloud)	
  in	
  charge	
  of	
  performing	
  the	
  computation,	
  and	
  we	
  do	
  not	
  consider	
  here	
  any	
  privacy or security	
   aspect.	
   Variations	
   of	
   the	
   proposed	
   method	
   to	
   perform	
   distributed,	
   secure	
   and privacy-­-preserving	
  computation	
  are	
  interesting	
  directions	
  for	
  progressing	
  the	
  research.

## Time-­-based	
  localization	
  with	
  asynchronous	
  nodes

In order	
   to	
   illustrate	
   the	
   principle	
   of	
   the	
   proposed	
   scheme,	
   we	
   need	
   first	
   to	
   introduce	
   a minimum	
  of	
  notation.	
  We	
  denote	
  by ti [ m ]	
   the	
   absolute	
   transmission	
  time	
  of	
  the	
  generic m th packet	
   sent	
   by	
   transmitting	
   node i , and	
   by rk [ m ] the absolute reception	
   time	
   of	
   the	
   same packet	
  by	
  the	
  receiving	
  node k .	
   Node k may	
  not	
  be	
  the	
  intended	
  destination	
  for	
  packet m and it	
   is	
   not	
   necessary	
   for k to	
   decode	
   the	
   whole	
   packet.	
   We	
   assume	
   only	
   that	
   node k overhears the	
  packet	
  and	
  decodes	
  the	
  minimum	
  set	
  of	
  control	
  information	
  (e.g.	
  the	
  header)	
  that	
  allow	
  to identify	
  the	
  source	
  node	
  (e.g.,	
  MAC	
  source	
  address)	
  and	
  to	
  discriminate	
  packet m from	
  other neighboring	
  packets	
  from	
  the	
  same	
  source.

Both	
   transmission	
   and	
   reception	
   times ti [ m ] and rk [ m ] are referred	
   to	
   an	
   ideal	
   absolute reference	
   clock	
   and	
   cannot	
   be	
   observed	
   directly.	
   What	
   can	
   be	
   measured	
   is	
   only	
   the local reception	
  timestamp ,	
  denoted	
  by sk [ m ],	
  according	
  to	
  the	
  local	
  clock	
  at	
  receiver k .	
  We	
  denote	
  by dik the	
  true	
  distance	
  between	
  transmitter	
   	
  and	
  receiver i k .	
  We	
  consider	
  a	
  static	
  scenario	
  where the position of all nodes can be considered	
   fixed at the timescale of interest, leaving extensions	
  to	
  moving	
  nodes	
  as	
  a	
  prominent	
  direction	
  for	
  further	
  study.

When	
   nodes i and k are	
   in	
   direct	
   Line-­-of-­-Sight	
   (LOS),	
   the	
   transmit	
   and	
   reception	
   times	
   are linked	
  by	
  ( c denoting	
  the	
  light	
  speed):

$$r _ { k } [ m ] = t _ { i } [ m ] + d _ { i k } [ m ] / c.$$

The	
  reception	
  timestamp	
  is	
  linked	
  to	
  the	
  absolute	
  arrival	
  time	
  by	
  the	
  following	
  relation:

$$s _ { k } [ m ] = a _ { k } + ( 1 + b _ { k } ) * r _ { k } [ m ] + h ( r _ { k } [ m ] ) + w _ { k } [ m ]$$

wherein ak and bk denote respectively	
   the clock bias (temporal	
   offset) and clock drift (frequency	
  offset)	
  of	
  receiving	
  clock k .	
   The	
   clock	
   drift	
   is	
   due	
   to	
   deviations	
  of	
  the	
  actual	
  clock frequency	
  from	
  its	
  nominal	
  value,	
  and	
  is	
  typically	
  limited	
  to	
  a	
  few	
  tens	
  of	
  ppm	
  for	
  commercial devices.	
  The	
  temporal	
  function hk(τ) ( τ denoting	
  a	
  generic	
  reception	
  instant)	
  accounts	
  for	
  any additional	
   slowly-­-varying	
   error	
   component,	
   possibly	
   non-­-linear,	
   caused	
   by	
   short-­-term	
   clock fluctuations.	
  This	
  error	
  component	
  is	
  highly	
  correlated	
  between	
  neighboring	
  packets	
  arriving at	
   the	
   same	
   receiver	
   within	
   a	
   small	
   interval.	
   Finally,	
   the	
   term wk m [ ] captures	
   the	
   residual measurement	
  error	
  component	
  associated	
  to	
  each	
  individual	
  reception	
  event	
  (including	
  e.g. clock	
   quantization,	
   timestamp	
   truncation	
   and	
   any	
   other	
   source	
   of	
   measurement	
   noise)	
   and can	
  be	
   modeled	
  as	
  an	
  independent	
  random	
  variable.	
  Note	
  that	
  eq.	
  (2)	
  focuses	
  exclusively	
  on clock	
   error	
   components.	
   We	
   are	
   not	
   considering	
   at	
   this	
   stage	
   additional	
   sources	
   of spatial measurement errors, like multipath and Non-­-Line-­-of-­-Sight (NLOS), which affect also synchronous	
  systems.	
  These	
  will	
  be	
  discussed	
  later	
  in	
  Sec.	
  4.

For	
   the	
   sake	
   of	
   illustration	
   simplicity,	
   consider	
   a	
   generic	
   scenario	
   with	
   multiple	
   nodes	
   in known	
   positions	
   ('anchors')	
   and	
   a	
   single	
   node	
   ('blind')	
   whose	
   position	
   is	
   unknown	
   and needs	
  to	
   be	
   determined.	
  Every	
  node	
  transmits	
  packets	
  that	
  are	
  overheard	
  and	
  timestamped by	
  other	
  nodes.	
  For	
  every	
  packet	
  traveling	
  from	
  node i to k we	
  can	
  write	
  one	
  equation	
  in	
  the form	
  of	
  (2),	
  resulting	
  in	
  a	
  system	
  of	
  equations	
  with	
  the	
  following	
  observables:

- ∞ Distances	
  between	
  pairs	
  of	
  anchor	
  nodes;
- ∞ Reception	
  timestamps sk [ m ];

and	
  the	
  following	
  types	
  of	
  of	
  unknowns:

- ∞ Clock	
  error	
  components: ak , bk and hk(τ) ;
- ∞ Transmission	
  times ti [ m ; ]
- ∞ Distances	
  (ranges)	
  between	
  the	
  blind	
  node	
  and	
  each	
  anchor	
  node;

In	
  order	
  to	
  locate	
  the	
  blind	
  node,	
  we	
  need	
  to	
  estimate	
  the	
  latter,	
  i.e.,	
  the	
  blind-­-anchor	
  ranges. It	
   turns	
   out	
   that	
   from	
   the	
   system	
   at	
   hand	
   we	
   cannot	
   obtain	
   direct	
   ranges	
   but	
   only pseudo-­ranges , i.e., a set	
   of distances	
   defined	
   up	
   to	
   a	
   common	
   unknown	
   bias	
   term.	
   This	
   is	
   not	
   a problem	
  since	
  there	
  are	
  well-­-known	
  methods	
  for	
  computing	
  a	
  position	
  from	
  a	
  set	
  of	
  pseudo-­ranges,	
  for	
  instance	
  the	
  standard	
  Iterative	
  Least	
  Squares	
  (ILS)	
  algorithm	
  used	
  in	
  GPS	
  [Tsu04].

In	
  order	
  to	
  obtain	
  pseudo-­-ranges	
  from	
  a	
  system	
  of	
  equations	
  of	
  the	
  form	
  (2)	
  we	
  need	
  to	
  deal with	
   the	
   other	
   unnecessary	
   unknowns	
   listed	
   above.	
   Generally	
   speaking,	
   each	
   unnecessary unknown	
  can	
  be	
  either eliminated upfront,	
  by	
  combining	
  (differentiating)	
  selected	
  equations, or	
  it	
  can	
  be estimated from	
  the	
  data	
  at	
  hand.	
  In	
  the	
  latter	
  case,	
  it	
  can	
  be	
  either	
  estimated jointly with	
   the	
   variables	
   of	
   interest	
   (i.e.	
   treated	
   as	
   a	
   nuisance	
   parameter)	
   or	
   it	
   can	
   be	
   estimated separately	
   and	
   then	
   compensated.	
   Therefore,	
   different	
   resolution	
   approaches	
   are	
   possible depending	
   on	
   how	
   each	
   unknown	
   is	
   treated.	
   Until	
   now,	
   only	
   a	
   few	
   pioneering	
   work	
   have started	
  to	
  formulate	
  and	
  investigate	
  some	
  of	
  these	
  methods.	
  One	
  of	
  the	
  intended	
  goals	
  of	
  the present	
  contribution	
  is	
  indeed	
  to	
  attract	
  further	
  research	
  to	
  explore	
  other	
  possible	
  solutions and	
  estimation	
  methods	
  for	
  the	
  problem	
  at	
  hand.

Some	
  previous	
  work	
  have	
  considered	
  a	
  simplified	
  clock	
  error	
  model	
  by	
  neglecting	
  the	
  clock drift bk and	
  the	
  slowly-­-varying	
  component hk(τ) .	
  In	
  this	
  case	
  eq.	
  (2)	
  simplifies	
  as	
  shown	
  in	
  Fig. 2-­-A.	
  One	
  possible	
  resolution	
  approach	
  is	
  to	
  differentiate	
  the	
  equations	
  relative	
  to	
  two	
  packets from	
  different	
  transmitters	
  arriving	
  at	
  the	
  same	
  receiver	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  get	
  rid	
  of	
  the	
  clock	
  bias ak (ref.	
  Fig	
  2-­-B)	
  then	
  treat	
  the	
  transmission	
  times	
  as	
  nuisance	
  parameters.	
  If	
  the	
  two	
  packets	
  are close	
  in	
  time,	
  such	
  a	
  differentiation	
  would	
  cancel	
  also	
  the	
  slowly-­-varying	
  component hk(τ) ,	
   if present.	
   Alternatively,	
   one	
   can	
   differentiate	
   the	
   equations	
   relative	
   to	
   reception	
   of	
   the	
   same packet	
  (from	
  a	
  single	
  transmitter)	
  arriving	
  at	
  two	
  different	
  receivers	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  get	
  rid	
  of	
  the transmission	
  times ti [ m ] (ref.	
  Fig	
  2-­-C) 	
  then	
  treat	
  the	
  clock	
  bias	
  as	
  nuisance	
  parameter.	
  These , two	
  approaches	
  have	
  been	
  considered	
  recently	
  in	
  [Col14]	
  and	
  [Ban14]	
  respectively.	
  However, the	
  simplest	
  approach	
  is	
  to	
  apply	
  a double	
  differentiation on	
  the	
  four	
  equations	
  between	
  a	
  pair of	
  transmitters	
  and	
  a	
  pair	
  of	
  receivers,	
  as	
  shown	
  in	
  Fig.	
  2-­-D,	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  get	
  rid	
  of	
  both	
  types	
  of unknowns.	
  This	
  method	
  has	
  been	
  termed Differential Time-­-Difference	
  of	
  Arrival	
  (DTDoA)	
  and should	
  be	
  distinguished	
  from	
  the	
  classical	
  Time-­-Difference	
  of	
  Arrival	
  (TDoA)	
  adopted	
  in	
  GPS. The	
  requirement	
  that	
  anchor	
  nodes	
  (e.g.,	
  satellites)	
  be	
  synchronized	
  applies	
  to	
  TDoA	
  but	
  not to	
  DTDoA.

The DTDoA	
   equation	
   appeared	
   a	
   decade	
   ago	
   in	
   the	
   field of interferometric	
   localization [Mar05]	
  and	
  was	
  later	
  considered	
  in	
  systems	
  where	
  time-­-differences	
  are	
  measured	
  by	
  means of waveform correlators [Fan07]. The idea to use DTDoA with simple timestamp measurements	
   from	
   legacy	
   wireless	
   devices	
   was	
   presented	
   and	
   tested	
   only	
   recently	
   in [Nag11]	
  and	
  [Fac14],	
  where	
  different	
  approaches	
  were	
  adopted	
  to	
  estimate	
  and	
  compensate for	
   the	
   clock	
   drift,	
   among	
   other	
   methodological	
   differences.	
   Interestingly,	
   both	
   work	
   report experimental validation results with COTS IEEE 802.11b devices achieving sub-­-meter accuracy	
   in	
   LOS	
   conditions.	
   Further	
   work	
   is	
   needed	
   to	
   explore	
   more	
   advanced	
   estimation techniques,	
  however	
  the	
  early	
  result	
  in	
  [Nag11]	
  and	
  [Fac14]	
  indicate	
  that	
  sub-­-meter	
  accuracy is	
  at	
  reach	
  nowadays	
  with current COTS	
  equipment,	
  at	
  least	
  in	
  LOS	
  conditions.

## System	
  model

From	
  a	
   system-­-level	
  point	
  of	
  view	
  however,	
  the	
  closest	
  work	
  is	
  represented	
  by	
  [Col14].	
  The system	
  model	
  considered	
  therein	
  is	
  a	
  particular	
  case	
  of	
  the	
  more	
  general	
  scenario	
  envisioned here.	
  In	
  general,	
  we	
  consider	
  three	
  types	
  of	
  nodes:

- ∞ Fixed	
  stations :	
  terrestrial	
  infrastructure	
  nodes,	
  whose	
  positions	
  are	
  precisely	
  known,	
  i.e., with	
  negligible	
  positioning	
  error.
- ∞ Mobile	
   nodes	
   with	
   GNSS , whose	
   positions	
   are	
   known	
   only	
   approximately,	
   i.e.,	
   with	
   an initial	
  error	
  of	
  several	
  meters	
  that	
  we	
  aim	
  at	
  reducing.
- ∞ Mobile	
   node	
   without	
   GNSS (blind	
   node),	
   whose	
   position	
   is	
   completely	
   unknown	
   and needs	
  to	
  be	
  determined.

Depending on the radio technology, fixed stations can be transmit-­-only (e.g. DVB-­-T broadcasting	
   towers	
   or LTE beacons),	
   receive-­-only (e.g. passive WiFi sensors) or both transmitters and receivers, e.g. Road-­-Side Units (RSU) transceivers. The mobile nodes (vehicles)	
  are	
  assumed	
  to	
  be	
  equipped	
  with	
  terrestrial	
  communication	
  transceivers	
  and	
  able to	
  transmit	
  to	
  and	
  receive	
  from	
  other	
  nodes,	
  both	
  fixed	
  (V2I	
  links)	
  and/or	
  mobile	
  (V2V).

In [Col14]	
   the	
   authors	
   have	
   considered	
   a	
   particularized	
   scenario	
   where	
   fixed	
   stations	
   are transmit-­-only	
   and	
   the	
   single	
   blind node	
   is receive-­-only.	
   The	
   other	
   mobile	
   nodes,	
   called 'helpers'	
   therein,	
   know	
   their	
   position	
   with	
   certain	
   limited	
   accuracy,	
   and	
   these	
   (inaccurate) positions	
  are	
  given	
  in	
  input	
  to	
  the	
  localization	
  algorithm	
  along	
  with	
  the	
  reception	
  timestamps. In	
   other	
   words,	
   we	
   have	
   two	
   sources	
   of	
   uncertainty	
   (or	
   noise):	
   in	
   the	
   timing	
   measurement and	
  in	
  the	
  helper	
  position.	
  Remarkably,	
  the	
  simulation	
  results	
  presented	
  in	
  [Col14]	
  show	
  that, under	
   certain	
   conditions, the	
   final	
   error	
   on	
   the	
   blind	
   node	
   position	
   is	
   smaller	
   than	
   the	
   initial error	
  on	
  the	
  helper	
  node	
  positions . In	
   other	
   words,	
   the	
   output	
   position	
   (of	
   the	
   blind	
   node)	
   is more	
  accurate	
  than	
  the	
  input	
  positions	
  (of	
  the	
  helper).	
  The	
  'accuracy	
  gain'	
  is	
  obviously	
  due	
  to the	
   additional	
   information	
   contributed	
   by	
   the	
   terrestrial	
   timing	
   measurements.	
   This	
   result shows	
   that,	
   in	
   principle,	
   one	
   can	
   further	
   refine	
   the	
   initial	
   positions	
   of	
   the	
   helper	
   nodes (obtained	
   by	
   GNSS) by	
   exploiting	
   the	
   terrestrial	
   pseudo-­-ranges	
   information	
   embedded	
   in	
   the reception	
  timestamp	
  data -	
   instead	
  of	
   additional	
  direct	
  ranging	
  measurements	
  as	
  envisioned in	
  [Gar12].	
  As	
  noted	
  there,	
  the	
  positioning	
  refinement	
  process	
  can	
  be	
  performed sequentially , by	
   feeding	
   back	
   the	
   new	
   (more	
   accurate)	
   position	
   into	
   the	
   estimation	
   problem	
   in	
   order	
   to refine the position	
   of another	
   node	
   and	
   so on, or jointly , via more	
   compact	
   estimation procedures	
  that	
  seek	
  to	
  resolve	
  all	
  node	
  positions	
  jointly	
  at	
  once.

## 4. Next	
  steps

The	
   preliminary	
   simulation	
   result	
   presented	
   in	
   [Col14],	
   obtained	
   in	
   a	
   simplified	
   scenario, should	
   be	
   taken	
   as	
   a proof-­-of-­-concept	
   indicating	
   a	
   direction	
   for	
   further	
   experimentation rather	
  than	
  a	
  conclusive	
  point.	
  We	
  do	
  not	
  claim	
  at	
  this	
  stage	
  that	
  the	
  exploitation	
  of	
  terrestrial timestamp	
  data	
  by	
  means	
  of	
  asynchronous	
  localization	
  algorithms	
  will always improve	
  over initial GNSS	
   accuracy,	
   but we claim that it has the potential of doing so under	
   certain conditions .	
  The	
  research	
  question	
  for	
  the	
  academic	
  community	
  is	
  therefore:

- (1) Under	
   which	
   conditions	
   terrestrial	
   timestamp	
   measurements	
   complementing	
   GNSS can	
  improve	
  positioning	
  accuracy	
  down	
  to	
  sub-­-meter	
  level? And	
  for	
  the	
  industry:
- (2) What	
  can	
  be	
  done,	
  e.g.	
  on	
  the	
  side	
  of	
  radio	
  receiver	
  design,	
  to	
  facilitate	
  achieving	
  those conditions?

The goal of this contribution	
   is	
   to solicit academy	
   and	
   industry	
   to	
   pick	
   these	
   research questions as stimuli for progressing further with theoretical analysis and field experimentation.	
  Hereafter	
  we	
  indicate	
  some	
  desirable	
  action	
  points	
  for	
  both	
  communities.

## Commoditization	
  of	
  accurate	
  timestamping.

The	
   attractiveness	
   of	
   the	
   proposed	
   method	
   for	
   practical	
   applications	
   ultimately	
   depends	
   on the	
   quantitative	
   impact	
   of	
   measurement	
   errors	
   into	
   the	
   final	
   position	
   estimation.	
   Generally speaking,	
  we	
  can	
  identify	
  the	
  following	
  sources	
  of	
  errors:

- ∞ Clock	
  errors ,	
   due	
  e.g.	
  to	
  the	
  (in)stability	
  of	
  clock	
  frequencies	
  and	
  timestamp	
  quantization, among	
  other	
  factors.
- ∞ Multipath	
  errors in	
  Line-­-of-­-Sight	
  (LOS)	
  conditions.
- ∞ Non-­-Line-­-of-­-Sight	
  (NLOS)	
  errors .

Recall	
  that	
  only	
  clock	
  errors	
  were	
  considered	
  in	
  eq.	
  (2),	
  since	
  the	
  focus	
  there	
  was	
  to	
  show	
  that node	
   synchronization	
   can	
   be	
   effectively	
   replaced	
   by	
   timestamp	
   data	
   processing.	
   The	
   other two	
  error	
  components,	
  namely	
  multipath	
  and	
  NLOS,	
  can	
  be	
  modeled	
  as	
  further	
  additive	
  terms to	
  eq.	
  (2).	
  However,	
  it	
  should	
  be	
  noted	
  that	
  while	
  the	
  clock	
  error	
  components	
  vary	
  in time ,	
  the multipath	
  and	
  NLOS	
  components	
  vary	
  in space .

In	
  order	
  to	
  exploit	
  the	
  potential	
  of	
  cooperative	
  opportunistic	
  localization,	
  as	
  augmentation	
  of or	
  extension	
  to	
  GNSS	
  systems,	
  the	
  collective	
  effect	
  of	
  all	
  these	
  error	
  sources	
  must	
  be	
  kept	
  low.

We	
  have	
  shown	
  that,	
  in	
  principle,	
  clock	
  errors	
  can	
  be	
  counteracted	
  by	
  data	
  processing	
  in	
  the initial	
  estimation	
  phase	
  (ref.	
  Fig.	
  1).	
  This	
  is	
  achieved	
  by	
  considering	
  multiple	
  measurements	
  in temporal	
  diversity,	
   that	
   is,	
   averaging	
   over	
   multiple	
   packets.	
   However,	
   the	
   adoption	
   of	
   more stable	
  receiver	
  clock	
  and	
  more	
  accurate	
  timestamping	
  capabilities	
  would	
  reduce	
  the	
  power	
  of measurement	
  noise	
  in	
  input,	
  thus	
  facilitating	
  the	
  task	
  of	
  the	
  processing	
  stage	
  and	
  allowing	
  to use	
   a	
   lower	
   number	
   data	
   points	
   (i.e.,	
   packets),	
   with	
   beneficial	
   effect	
   also	
   on	
   the	
   estimation delay	
   and	
   computational	
   complexity.	
   When	
   a	
   GNSS	
   module	
   is	
   co-­-located	
   with	
   a	
   terrestrial wireless	
  receiver	
  (e.g.	
  in	
  OBU	
  or	
  smartphone),	
  the	
  GNSS	
  signal	
  can	
  be	
  passed	
  to	
  the	
  latter	
  in order	
   to	
   control	
   the	
   clock	
   signal	
   used	
   by	
   the	
   timestamping	
   function,	
   thus	
   improving	
   the timestamp	
  accuracy.

Similar	
  considerations	
  apply	
  for	
  the	
  multipath	
  error	
  that	
  is	
  encountered	
  in	
  LOS	
  links	
  due	
  to the	
  composition	
  of	
  multiple	
  signal	
  replicas	
  arriving	
  after	
  the	
  first	
  direct	
  path.	
  The	
  magnitude of	
   this	
   error	
   can	
   be	
   up	
   to	
   a	
   few	
   meters	
   for	
   each	
   individual	
   ranging	
   measurement	
   (see	
   e.g. [Exe12]).	
   It	
   can	
   be	
   counteracted	
   in	
   the	
   estimation	
   phase	
   by	
   leveraging spatial diversity	
   and redundancy,	
  i.e.,	
  considering	
  an	
  increased	
  number	
  of	
  anchors.	
  If	
  the	
  blind	
  node	
  is	
  in	
  motion, spatial diversity	
  is	
  transported	
  into temporal diversity,	
  and	
  the	
  same	
  goal	
  can	
  be	
  achieved	
  by considering	
  multiple	
  packets	
  from	
  the	
  same	
  (smaller)	
  set	
  of	
  anchors.	
  Also	
  in	
  this	
  case	
  it	
  would be beneficial	
   to	
   reduce ex ante the multipath	
   error	
   of	
   each	
   measurement	
   data	
   point	
   by adopting specific signal processing	
   techniques	
   in the receiver, e.g. to discriminate	
   and timestamp	
   the first arriving	
   signal	
   replica,	
   while	
   still	
   leaving	
   the	
   rest	
   of	
   the	
   receiver	
   chain tuning	
  on	
  the strongest replica	
  for	
  packet	
  decoding.	
  These	
  algorithms	
  have	
  been	
  well	
  studied in	
   the	
   realm	
   of	
   GPS	
   technology	
   and	
   could	
   be	
   reused	
   in	
   terrestrial	
   wireless	
   communication devices,	
   probably	
   with	
   a	
   relatively	
   minor marginal cost in terms	
   of	
   implementation	
   and resource	
  consumption.

We	
  remark	
  however	
  that	
  the	
  experimental	
  results	
  reported	
  by	
  [Nag11]	
  and	
  [Fac14],	
  obtained in LOS	
   conditions	
   with	
   COTS	
   WiFi	
   devices	
   that	
   do	
   not	
   implement	
   any	
   mitigation	
   strategy against multipath and/or clock errors, indicate that even without such additional improvements	
  sub-­-meter	
  accuracy	
  is	
  at	
  reach	
  nowadays	
  with	
  standard	
  devices.

## Robust	
  estimation	
  algorithms	
  for	
  NLOS	
  conditions

The	
   most	
   serious	
  source	
  of	
   error	
   in	
   our	
   scenario	
   is	
   undoubtedly	
   NLOS	
   reception.	
  In	
   ranging measurements NLOS paths introduce (possibly large) positive bias. NLOS mitigation strategies	
  are	
   an	
   active	
   field	
   of	
   research	
   and	
   already	
   cover	
   a	
   wide	
   range	
   of	
   approaches	
   (see e.g.	
   [Guv09],	
   [Vag13]	
   and	
   references	
   therein).	
   However,	
   most	
   previous	
   work	
   has	
   addressed NLOS	
  problem	
  in	
  the	
  context	
  of ranging techniques,	
  while	
  our	
  framework	
  is	
  based	
  on pseudo-­ranges (or	
   equivalently,	
   range	
   differences).	
   Developing	
   robust	
   estimation	
   methods	
   that	
   can cope	
  with	
  NLOS	
  scenarios	
  is	
  definitely	
  one	
  of	
  the	
  most	
  compelling	
  research	
  challenges	
  in	
  the progress	
  of	
  this	
  work.	
  However,	
  in	
  certain	
  C-­-ITS	
  applications	
  one	
  can	
  expect	
  that	
  a	
  sufficient number	
  of	
  other	
  nodes	
  are	
  anyway	
  in	
  LOS	
  conditions,	
  e.g.	
  neighboring	
  vehicles	
  and	
  RSUs.

One	
  could	
  think	
  that	
  the	
  'commoditization'	
  of	
  more	
  accurate	
  receiver	
  timestamping,	
  i.e.,	
  the implementation	
   in	
   COTS	
   devices	
   of	
   clock	
   error	
   and	
   multipath	
   error	
   mitigation	
   techniques, would be irrelevant considering	
   that NLOS errors, which cannot be resolved by these techniques,	
   are the dominating	
   error	
   source	
   in practical settings. In other words, why attacking	
  the	
  'small'	
  errors	
  (clock	
  and	
  multipath)	
  while	
  the	
  'large'	
  ones	
  (NLOS)	
  are	
  there?

We	
   argue	
   instead	
   that	
   the	
   'commoditization'	
   of	
   accurate	
   receiver	
   timestamping	
   would	
   be beneficial	
  also	
  towards	
  the	
  goal	
  of	
  reducing	
  NLOS	
  errors.	
  First,	
  we	
  should	
  distinguish	
  between 'heavy	
   NLOS'	
   and	
   'moderate	
   NLOS'	
   conditions,	
   depending	
   on	
   whether	
   NLOS	
   links	
   are	
   the majority	
  or	
  not.	
  In	
  moderate	
  NLOS	
  scenarios	
  it	
  is	
  not	
  difficult	
  to	
  identify	
  and	
  exclude	
  the	
  few NLOS links with pure data-­-driven approaches. Furthermore, the reduction of the measurement	
   noise	
   for	
   LOS	
   links	
   will intrinsically	
   facilitate	
   the job of NLOS	
   mitigation techniques, as the subset of LOS measurement	
   will yield a higher degree of internal consistency,	
   making	
   it	
   easier	
   to	
   tell	
   apart	
   the	
   'outlier'	
   NLOS	
   data.	
   Third,	
   improving	
   the achievable	
   localization	
   accuracy	
   in	
   favorable	
   conditions	
   (LOS	
   or	
   moderate	
   NLOS)	
   down	
   to decimeter	
  level,	
  would	
  certainly	
  motivate	
  additional	
  experimentation	
  and	
  pilot	
  deployment	
  of communication	
  system	
  with	
  built-­-in	
  localization	
  functions.	
  This	
  in	
  turn	
  bears	
  the	
  potential	
  to attract more relevant research work on robust estimation methods in adverse NLOS conditions,	
  triggering	
  a	
  positive	
  virtuous	
  cycle.

## Extension	
  to	
  tracking

For	
   the	
   sake	
   of	
   simplicity	
   we	
   have	
   presented	
   the	
   fundamental	
   principles	
   of	
   the	
   proposed method	
   with	
   reference	
   to	
   a	
   static	
   scenario.	
   Extension	
   of	
   the	
   proposed	
   model	
   to	
   dynamic scenarios,	
   where	
   some	
   of	
   the	
   nodes	
   are	
   in	
   motion,	
   is	
   an	
   important	
   direction	
   for	
   further research.	
   Going	
   from	
   static	
   localization	
   to	
   dynamic	
   tracking	
   implies	
   certainly	
   an	
   increase	
   of computational	
   complexity,	
   as	
   pseudo-­-ranges	
   and	
   the	
   other	
   parameters	
   of	
   interest	
   vary	
   in time.	
  However,	
  since	
  node	
  mobility	
  increases	
  both	
  spatial	
  and	
  temporal	
  diversity,	
  it	
  should	
  be advantageous	
  in	
  terms	
  of	
  achievable	
  accuracy.	
  This	
  is	
  true	
  for	
  pure	
  GNSS-­-based	
  localization, and	
  a	
  fortiori	
  for	
  hybrid	
  GNSS/terrestrial	
  localization.

## 5. Conclusions

We	
  envision	
  an	
  increasing	
  level	
  of	
  integration	
  between	
  GNSS	
  positioning	
  and	
  terrestrial	
  radio localization,	
  with	
  the	
  latter	
  augmenting	
  and	
  complementing	
  the	
  former.	
  Given	
  the	
  ubiquitous presence	
  of	
  legacy	
  radio	
  signals	
  and	
  the	
  widespread	
  of	
  multi-­-radio	
  devices,	
  it	
  is	
  appealing	
  to devise	
   methods	
   to	
   reuse	
   available	
   signals	
   and	
   devices	
   for	
   localization	
   purposes.	
   We	
   have shown	
  that	
  this	
  can	
  be	
  achieved	
  in	
  principle	
  by	
  relying	
  simply	
  on	
  receiver	
  timestamps,	
  with no need of additional ranging methods or protocols. A few pioneering work have demonstrated	
  that	
  time-­-based	
  localization	
  in	
  asynchronous	
  networks	
  can	
  achieve	
  sub-­-meter accuracy.	
   Waiving	
   the	
   requirement	
   of	
   node	
   synchronization	
   is	
   an	
   important	
   step	
   towards unlocking	
  the	
  potential	
  for	
  opportunistic	
  and	
  cooperative	
  radio	
  localization	
  in	
  combination	
  to GNSS,	
  which	
  we	
  hope	
  will	
  motivate	
  further	
  research	
  and	
  experimentation	
  in	
  this	
  direction.

## Acknowledgments

The author would	
   like to thank (in alphabetical	
   order)	
   Angelo	
   Coluccia,	
   Nicoló Facchi, Francesco	
   Gringoli,	
   Giuseppe	
   Ricci	
   and	
   Andrea	
   Toma	
   for	
   several	
   fruitful	
   discussions	
   about resolution	
  approaches	
  for	
  time-­-based	
  localization	
  in	
  asynchronous	
  networks.

## References

[Tsu04]	
   J. B.-­-Y. Tsui. Fundamentals	
   of	
   Global	
   Positioning	
   System	
   Receivers:	
   A	
   Software Approach.	
  John	
  Wiley	
  &amp;	
  Sons,	
  2004.

[Mar05]	
   M	
   Maroti,	
   B	
   Kusy,	
   and	
   G.	
   Balogh.	
   Radio	
   interferometric	
   geolocation.	
   ACM	
   SenSys, 2005.

[Fan07]	
  H.	
  Fan	
  and	
  C.	
  Yan.	
  Asynchronous	
  differential	
  TDOA	
  for	
  sensor	
  self-­-	
  localization.	
  IEEE ICASSP	
  2007.

[Guv09]	
  I.	
   Guvenc,	
   C.	
   C. Chong,	
   A	
   Survey	
   on	
   ToA	
   Based	
   Wireless	
   Localization	
   and	
   NLOS Mitigation	
  Techniques,	
  IEEE	
  Communications	
  Surveys	
  &amp;	
  Tutorials,	
  11(3),	
  2009.

[Nag11]	
  A.	
  Nagy,	
  E.	
  Exel,	
  P.	
  Loschmidt,	
  G.	
  Gaderer,	
  Time-­-based	
  Localization	
  in	
  unsynchronized wireless	
  LAN	
  for	
  industrial	
  automation	
  systems.	
  IEEE	
  ETFA	
  2011.

[Gar12]	
  R.	
  Garello,	
  J.	
  Samson,	
  M.	
  Spirito,	
  H.	
  Wymeersch,	
  Peer-­-to-­-peer	
  cooperative	
  positioning. Part	
  II,	
  Hybrid	
  devices	
  with	
  GNSSS	
  &amp;	
  Terrestrial	
  ranging	
  capabilities.	
  InsideGNSS,	
  July/August 2012.

[Exe12] R. Exel, Receiver Design for Time-­-based ranging with IEEE 802.11b Signals, International	
  Journal	
  of	
  Navigation	
  and	
  Observation,	
  2012.

[Vag13] R. M. Vaghefi, J. Schloemann, R. M. Buehrer, NLOS Mitigation in TOA-­-Based Localization	
  Using	
  Semidefinite	
  Programming.	
  IEEE	
  WPNC	
  2013.

[Col14] A. Coluccia, F. Ricciato, G. Ricci, Positioning with Signals of Opportunity,	
   IEEE Communications	
  Letter,	
  18(2),	
  February	
  2014.

[Ami14]	
  A.	
  Amini,	
  R.	
  M.	
  Vaghefi,	
  J.	
  M.	
  de	
  la	
  Garza,	
  R.	
  M.	
  Buehrer,	
  Improving	
  GPS-­-based	
  Vehicle Positioning	
   for Intelligent Transportation	
   Systems.	
   IEEE	
   Intelligent	
   Vehicles	
   Symposium 2014.

[Ban14]	
   F.	
   Bandiera,	
   A.	
   Coluccia,	
   G.	
   Ricci,	
   F.	
   Ricciato,	
   D.	
   Spano,	
   Time-­-based	
   localization	
   in asynchronous	
   WSN, 12th IEEE International Conference on Embedded	
   and Ubiquitous Computing	
  (EUC	
  2014),	
  Milano,	
  26-­-28	
  August	
  2014.

[Fac14]	
   N. Facchi,	
   F. Gringoli,	
   F. Ricciato,	
   A. Toma,	
   Emitter	
   Localization	
   from	
   Reception Timestamps	
  in	
  Asynchronous	
  Networks,	
  July	
  2014, arXiv:1407.8056 .

Figure	
  1	
  -	
  Conceptual	
  workflow	
  diagram	
  of	
  a	
  two-­-stage	
  localization	
  procedure	
  based	
  on	
  reception	
  timestamps.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0474v1-figure-e0791ba7-6179-412c-a4de-b1c82b6b8ce8.jpg)

Figure	
  2	
  	
  -­-	
  Compact	
  overview	
  of	
  different	
  approaches	
  for	
  asynchronous	
  time-­-based	
  localization	
  considered	
  in	
  recent literature.	
   The	
   DTDOA	
   procedures	
   presented	
   in	
   [Nag11]	
  and	
   [Fac14]	
   include	
   also	
   clock	
   drift	
   compensation	
   (not shown	
  in	
  the	
  equation).

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0474v1-figure-a956bd85-2864-4ae8-ac4d-520fb2e8e82b.jpg)

|     | Transmi(ers* Receivers*   | Equa1on**(simplified)*                                                                             | References*       |
|-----|---------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------|
| A.# | i ! k m !                 | s k [ m ] = a k + t i [ m ] + d ik c + noise                                                       |                   |
| B.# | i ! j ! k m ! m+1 !       | s k [ m + 1] - s k [ m ] = = t j [ m + 1] - t i [ m ] + d jk - d ik c + noise                      | [Col14]#          |
| C.# | k l i ! m !               | s k [ m ] - s l [ m ] = = a k - a l + d ik - d il c + noise                                        | [Ban14]#          |
| D.# | i ! j ! k l m+1 ! m !     | s k [ m + 1] - s k [ m ] + s l [ m + 1] - s l [ m ] = = d jk - d ik + d jl - d il c + noise DTDoA% | [Nag11]# [Fac14]# |
Fabio Ricciato
Time to timestamp: opportunistic cooperative localization from reception time measurements
We present a general framework for improving and extending GNSS-based
positioning by leveraging opportunistic measurements from legacy terrestrial
radio signals. The proposed approach requires only that participating nodes
collect and share reception timestamps of incoming packets and/or other
reference signals transmitted by other fixed or mobile nodes, with no need of
inter-node synchronization. The envisioned scheme couples the idea of
cooperative GNSS augmentation with recent pioneering work in the field of
time-based localization in asynchronous networks. In this contribution we
present the fundamental principles of the proposed approach and discuss the
system-level aspects that make it particularly appealing and timely for
Cooperative ITS applications, with the goal of motivating further research and
experimentation in this direction.