应对意外：野生环境下的快速可靠RFID缺失标签检测

36 浏览量更新于2024-08-28 收藏 213KB PDF 举报

"这篇研究论文‘Expecting the Unexpected: Fast and Reliable Detection of Missing RFID Tags in the Wild’由Muhammad Shahzad和Alex X. Liu撰写，来自美国密歇根州立大学计算机科学与工程系。文章关注的是在实际环境中如何快速且可靠地检测到丢失的RFID标签，特别是当标签群体中包含未知ID的意外标签时，如何减少错误的正向响应（即误报）。 RFID（无线频率识别）系统常被用于通过附着廉价的被动RFID标签来追踪和监控产品的缺失情况。现有的RFID标签缺失检测协议依赖于标签群体只包含已知ID的标签。然而，在现实应用中，标签群体往往混杂有未知ID的标签，这些被称为意外标签，它们可能导致错误的正向响应，使丢失的标签被错误地标记为存在。本文的研究重点在于解决如何在包含意外标签的群体中检测缺失的标签。作者提出了一个名为RUN的新协议，该协议通过执行多个具有不同种子的帧来缓解意外错误正向响应的影响。RUN首先估计群体中的意外标签数量，然后结合错误正向概率来优化缺失标签的检测时间。这种方法旨在提高检测效率，减少由于意外标签导致的误报，从而提升整个RFID系统的准确性和可靠性。 RUN协议的创新之处在于其动态适应性和对环境变化的容忍度，这使得它能够在复杂和不可预测的环境中有效地工作。通过这种方式，RUN不仅能够准确地检测到缺失的RFID标签，还能降低因未知ID标签引发的系统错误，这对于大规模RFID部署尤其重要，因为它可以确保库存管理、供应链跟踪和其他基于RFID的应用程序的精确运行。这篇研究论文为RFID技术在实际应用中的挑战提供了一种新的解决方案，尤其是针对意外标签问题，这将有助于推动RFID系统在各种工业和商业场景中的更广泛和更可靠的应用。"

Expecting the Unexpected: Fast and Reliable

etection of Missing RFID Tags in the Wild

Muhammad Shahzad and Alex X. Liu

Department of Compute r Science and Engineering

Michigan State University

East Lansing, Michigan, USA

{shahzad m, alexliu}@cse.msu.edu

Abstract—RFID systems have been deployed to detect missing

products by afﬁxing them with cheap passive RFID tags and

monitoring them with RFID readers. Existing missing tag detec-

tion protocols require the tag popul ation to contain only those

tags whose IDs are already known to the reader. However, in

reality, t ag population s often contain tags with unknown IDs,

called unexpected tags, and cause unexpected false positives i.e.,

due to them, missing tags are detected as present. We take

the ﬁrst step towards addressing the problem of detecting the

missing tags from a population th at contains un expected tags.

Our protocol, RUN, mitigates the adverse effects of unexpected

false positives by executing multiple frames with different seeds.

It minimizes the missing tag detecti on time by ﬁrst estimating the

number of unexpected tags and then using it along with the false

positive probability to obtain optimal frame sizes and number

of times Aloha frames should be executed. RUN works with

multiple readers with overlapping regions. It i s easy to deploy

because it is implemented on readers as a software module and

does not require modiﬁcations to tags or to the communication

protocol between tags and readers. We imp lemented RUN along

with four major missing tag detection protocols and the fastest

tag ID collection protocol and compared th em side-by-side. Our

experimental results show that RUN always achieves the required

reliability whereas the best existing protocol achieves a maximum

reliability of only 67%.

I. INTRODUCTION

A. Background & Motivation

Shoplifting, employee the ft, and vendor fraud have become

major causes of lost capital for retailers [14]. In 2011 alon e,

the retailers lost an estimated 34.5 billion dollars due to

these causes [1]. With the beneﬁts of not requiring a line-

of-sight and low cost of ta gs (e.g., 5 cents per tag [11]), radio

frequency identiﬁcation (RFID) systems have been deployed

for monitorin g products by afﬁxing them with cheap passive

RFID tags an d using RFID readers, which are given the IDs of

the tags that are being monitored, to detect any missing tags.

A tag is a microchip with an anten na in a compact package

that has limited computin g power and communication range .

There are two types of tags: (1) passive tags, which power u p

by harvesting the radio frequency energy from readers (as th ey

do not have their own power sources) and h ave communication

range often less than 20 feet; (2) active tags, which have their

own power sources and have relatively longer communication

range. A reader has a dedicated power source with sign iﬁca nt

computing power. It transmits queries to a set of tags an d the

tags respond over a shared wireless medium . In this paper, we

deal with both passive and active RFID tags.

B. Summary & Limitations of Prior Art

There are two ty pes of missing tag detection protocols:

probabilistic [9], [15] and deterministic [7], [8], [18]. The

probabilistic protocols are faster but only report the event

that some tags are missing, with out pin pointing exactly which

ones. The deterministic protocols return IDs of all the missing

tags but are comparatively slower. Both approaches have their

merits. In fact, they are comp le mentary to each other, and

should be used together. For example, a probabilistic protocol

should be used to detect a missing tag event and once detected,

a deterministic protocol should be invoked to identif y which

tags are missing. Several probabilistic protocols such as TRP

[15] and EMTD [9] and determ inistic protocols such as IIP

[7], MTI [18], and SFMTI [8] have been proposed.

There are two key limitations of existing protocols. The

ﬁrst limitation is that all existing protocols assume a perfect en-

vironm ent with no unexpected tags, which is not a realistic as-

sumption. In reality, tag p opulation s often contain unexpected

tags whose ID s are unknown. Here we give three examples.

For the ﬁrst example, in airports where an airline company

uses RFID readers to monitor baggage of its passengers, the

tags of othe r a irline’s baggage, which are in the vicinity

of this airline’s readers, also respond to the queries of this

airline’s readers. For the second example, in a large warehouse

rented to multiple tenants, one tenant’s RFID readers receive

responses from ta gs of other tenants. For the third example,

in a retail store that u ses RFID readers to monitor only

expensive merchandize, the readers receive responses from

tags of inexpensive merchan dize as well. Similar scenarios

exist in other settings such as hospitals and malls. Existing

protocols can not handle the presence of unexpected tags

because they ﬁll up unexpected slots in Aloha frames resultin g

in unexpected false positives.

The second major limitation of existing protocols is that

except TRP, none of them is comp liant with the EPCGlobal

Class 1 Generation 2 (C1G2) RFID standard [4]. These pro-

tocols require the manufacturers to put random bit seque nces

in tags for calculating specia lized hash functions. They also

require the tags to be able to receive and interpre t “pre-

vector” and/or “post-vector” frames to select slots in frames.

Such functionalities are not provisioned in the C1G2 standard

because tags, especially the passive ones, do not have enough

computa tional power. It is important for an RFID protocol

to be comp liant with the C1G2 standard becau se the cheap

commerc ia lly available off-the-shelf (COTS) tags follow the

C1G2 standard. A protocol that is not complian t with the

2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM)

下载后可阅读完整内容，剩余8页未读，立即下载

weixin_38661800

粉丝: 4
资源: 974

应对意外：野生环境下的快速可靠RFID缺失标签检测

JSqlparser4.4版作者提供的应急版，解决无法解析mysql中JSON_OBJECT函数存在其它函数问题

Streaming.Sharing.Stealing.Big.Data.and.the.Future.of.Entertainment

PLS-00103: Encountered the symbol "：" when expecting one of the following:

was expecting one of:

Error: Syntax error, found END-OF-STATEMENT when expecting one of: % . = => Ptcor01.f90

运行的时候报出 Was expecting one of: "&" "&&" "::" 这是为什么

requests.exceptions.jsondecodeerror: [errno expecting value] : 0

ORA-06550: line 159, column 4: PLS-00103: Encountered the symbol ";" when expecting one of the following: loop

最新资源