Loading
Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · October 30, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Ultra-wideband (UWB) enables high-accuracy distance estimation (ranging), but performance degrades in non-line-of-sight (NLOS) conditions. When UWB tags are worn, the human body inevitably causes a wearer-induced NLOS (WNLOS), yielding significant errors; still, despite its relevance, WNLOS remains understudied. Moreover, WNLOS detection typically must occur on-device at the tag, requiring classification accuracy to be balanced against tight runtime and energy constraints often hard to meet with machine learning (ML) -- the dominating NLOS classification approach. Meanwhile, UWB radio link indicators (LI) offer a faster and lightweight alternative that has rarely been explored. We study existing on-device ML and LI classifiers when applied to WNLOS, and propose novel hybrid ones exploiting their complementarity. We focus on chest-worn tags and analyze 21 classifiers on a dataset of 1.5 million samples across channels, PHY settings, environments, subjects, and orientations. Results show that while all of them achieve good classification accuracy, relative performance, including ranging errors due to misclassification, depends heavily on channel and PHY configuration. Runtime and energy efficiency also vary dramatically; some techniques offer marginal accuracy gains while consuming up to 39.6x more energy. Therefore, we also introduce a recommender tool to identify optimal classifiers under user-defined constraints, publicly released with our dataset.