NIST Technical Note 1914

2015 Location-Based Services R&D

Summit

Harris Feldman

Tracy McElvaney

This publication is available free of charge from:

http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.TN.1914
NIST Technical Note 1914

2015 Location-Based Services R&D

Summit

Harris Feldman 

Corner Alliance

Washington, DC

Tracy McElvaney

Public Safety Communications Research Division

Advanced Communications Research Group

This publication is available free of charge from: 

http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.TN.1914 

April 2016 

U.S. Department of Commerce

Penny Pritzker, Secretary

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Willie May, Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology and Director
Certain commercial entities, equipment, or materials may be identified in this

document in order to describe an experimental procedure or concept adequately.

Such identification is not intended to imply recommendation or endorsement by the

National Institute of Standards and Technology, nor is it intended to imply that the

entities, materials, or equipment are necessarily the best available for the purpose. 

National Institute of Standards and Technology Technical Note 1914

Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. Tech. Note 1914, 12 pages (April 2016) 

CODEN: NTNOEF

This publication is available free of charge from: 

http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.TN.1914
2015 Location-Based

Services R&D Summit

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

PURPOSE

The Public Safety Communications Research Program (PSCR)

convened over 80 stakeholders at the Department of Commerce Labs,

Boulder, CO campus to build on the findings presented in the 2015

Location-Based Services R&D Roadmap Report. The Location-Based

Services (LBS) Summit – held October 21-22, 2015 – intended to

socialize the roadmap with a broader stakeholder base and determine

the core technology challenges inhibiting public safety’s effective and

expanded use of LBS in daily operations.

The Summit identified clearly defined LBS technology gaps, prioritized capabilities,

and specific problem statements that could be addressed using NIST R&D funds.

Workshop Results

PSCR R&D Investment Criteria

Rewards/Results Unique to PS Impact on PS

Processes

Leverage Feasibility

Using the investment criteria above, Summit attendees identified the following six

gaps as the highest priority LBS R&D investment areas for PSCR to consider as it

transitions into LBS Program planning and execution:

3D Geolocation

Mapping

LBS Interoperability

LBS Power Consumption

Standardization of LBS Capabilities

Location-Enabled Wearable Devices

Priority R&D

Topic Areas

3D Geolocation

Mapping

LBS Interoperability

LBS Power Consumption

Standardization of LBS Capabilities

Location-Enabled Wearable Devices

Attendees developed

problem statements

for each LBS R&D

topic area

Attendees were instructed to identify and prioritize the most pressing technology

gaps limiting the use of LBS in public safety today. Gaps were prioritized based on

PSCR's investment criteria developed in close collaboration with FirstNet and the

PSAC.
Attendee Developed Problem Statements

3D Geolocation

Inability to precisely and persistently locate public safety persons and assets in order to locate responders

in trouble and manage public safety personnel & assets in real-time.

First responders need to obtain the civic address/coordinates of the public safety personnel and asset

location, plus additional information such as floor, suite, apartment, or other information needed to

adequately identify the location of the first responder and/or assets.

Information includes: Indoor, outdoor, 3D location, latitude, longitude, altitude, and other pertinent geolocation data.

Solutions need to account for public safety reliability and resiliency requirements.

Mapping

Lack of a nationwide interoperable ‘base map’ providing for collaboration that includes: Uniform,

interoperable base layer; Survey level accuracy; Multi-organization collaboration; Interoperable access;

Credentialing/User-profile; 2D & 3D; Indoor and outdoor locations.

Lack of capability to capture and integrate data into ‘base map’.

LBS Interoperability

Lack of interface interoperability between applications, devices, positioning, mapping, and location

information sharing. There needs to be a uniform way to read in and display maps.

Need for interoperable wearables and sensors.

Need a framework for testing and certification (software development kit/location toolkit).

LBS Power Consumption

Intelligent LBS chip and application management is not driven by use case, role, situational awareness,

status, etc.

LBS today are too reliant on GPS which has a variety of cons (including significant power consumption)

and needs to be augmented by other LBS technologies.

No clear understanding of the power consumption of various LBS technologies.

Maps are not cached on public safety devices, which increases power consumption.

Persistent reliance on visual LBS user interfaces drains power.

Standardization of LBS Capabilities

As location based services evolve and are used by public safety, a uniform, interoperable, and secure

framework needs to exist to ensure that the location information available is accessible and consumable by

public safety (or shared with others as appropriate).

Location-Enabled Wearable Devices

Location-enabled wearable devices or sensors are not currently designed to operate in all environmental

conditions and are not designed to meet a tiered set of public safety specific requirements which address

ruggedization, usability, operability, redundancy, mapping data, on/off network, user/command interfaces, and positional capabilities.
Who?

What?

Public Safety Operations:

Gap Stakeholders:

GAP: 3D Geolocation

How?

Inability to precisely and persistently locate public safety persons and assets in order to locate responders in trouble

and manage public safety personnel and assets in real-time.

Current Initiatives?

Public safety entities and first

responder functions: law

enforcement/Fire/EMS, search &

rescue, emergency management, and command & control

Public safety activities requiring

rapid response and/or detailed

planning: incident management,

disaster planning, rapid response

Current gap prevents deployment

of LBS apps...restricting location to

general proximity, preventing

public safety officials from locating

assets by z-axis

Operational need and Federal

guidance (FCC 4th Report & Order)

have spawned Industry activity in

the space: barometric-based z-axis

capability, sensor data for indoor

location

Allowable levels of location

uncertainty across X, Y, Z axis

& associated required

confidence levels

Baseline performance levels

for LBS signals including

bandwidth, data rate, and

immunity to noise

Operational requirement for

LBS data refresh time

intervals, referred to as

'Delta t'

WiFi/BT/UWB signal designed

for positioning use (in

addition to coverage &

speed)

Data format standard for

interoperability between

units or devices

Define guidelines for public

safety geolocation accuracy,

update rate, and latency

Decipher location from

multi-sourced data

including, GPS, OTDOA,

WiFi, LTE-U, Bluetooth, etc.

Incorporate real-time

barometric pressure

variation to support zaxis accuracy

Further develop existing

capabilities: GPS/GNSS, TOA, OTDOA, AoA, RSS &

models

Measure key geolocation

metrics: DOP, time-to-fix,

delta t: refresh

Environment to test

measurement methods

simulating: indoor, outdoor,

impairments, geometric

dilution of precision

conditions

Precision reference

measurement system for

3D LBS & assess accuracy

across devices/systems

First responders arrive on

scene equipped with realtime environmental &

contextual site intelligence

(building, floor, room &

method of approach data)

based on X,Y & Z locationbased services data broadcast

from critical assets. Data

enables complete situational

awareness, coordinated

search & rescue, and

avoidance of dangerous

environments including fire

flow & friendly fire

Location Accuracy: Signal Specs: Data Refresh Rate:

Signal

Structure:

Location Data

Format:

X, Y, Z Axis Minimum

Operating Standards:

Composite

Geolocation:

Pressure Sensor

Compensation:

Capability

Enhancement:

X,Y,Z Precision

Metrics:

3D Geolocation

Test Bed:

3D System

Calibration:

Requirements to collect:

Standards to develop:

Technological capabilities to build:

Measurement capabilities to deploy:

Public safety units

responsible for tactical

coordination and/or logistics

and event planning will

benefit greatly from 3D

geolocation capability

development. Anticipate

primarily servicing elements

with a first response element

Summary: First responders need to obtain the civic address/coordinates of the public safety personnel and asset location, plus additional information such

as floor, suite, apartment, or other information needed to adequately identify the location of the first responder and/or assets. Information includes: indoor,

outdoor, 3D location, latitude, longitude, altitude, and other pertinent geo-location data. Solutions need to account for public safety reliability and resiliency

requirements.

(1) Hardware (battery life, ruggedization, local processing

power)

(2) Network (coverage, spectrum availability)

(3) Sensor performance

(1) Internet of Things (commercial users saturate

spectrum)

(2) Increased device loading due to advanced

technologies may outpace development of devices

Current State

Impacts

Development

Enablers Future State

Technical Barriers Potential Disruptors

Who?

What?

Public Safety Operations:

Gap Stakeholders:

GAP: LBS Interoperability

How?

There exists a lack of interoperability between LBS applications, devices, positioning, mapping, and information

sharing.

Current Initiatives?

Public safety personnel responsible

for coordinating communications

and incident response, including

incident commanders and

dispatchers

All coordination and

communication activities conducted

with multiple agencies at a given

scene

Inability to ingest and respond to

standardized and shared LBS

intelligence creates overlapping

and inefficient use of critical

resources in incident response,

fracturing inter-agency

coordination. Inefficiencies slow

adoption of LBS by reducing the

potential value-add of LBS

capabilities

Current work in the space includes

proposed standards to the FCC

E911 indoor location requirements

and efforts by TCS, Intrado, and

other industry developers

Capacity and capabilities

needed to store common set

of LBS data, i.e. cloud,

servers, etc.

Specific interoperability

problems experienced

currently to baseline against

future state.

Consistent processes and

governance for raw

information handling (x,y,z,

motion, environment, wind,

etc.)

Consistent format for

location data for

interoperability between

units and devices

Defined guidelines for public

safety geolocation including

update rate, accuracy, &

latency

Central and secure hub for

data storage, processing,

and retrieval on a national

scale

Data integration tool

utilized to standardize

co-located mapping data

from disparate sources

Public Safety functions and

responds to incidents in a

seamless and coordinated

manner with situational

awareness up, down, and

across the chain-ofcommand. Agencies arrive on

scene with pre-planned

operational capabilities and

update coordination plans in

real time. The public safety

domain is supported by

widespread access to

innovative, cost-efficient

technology enabled by state

of the art products and

applications

Data Storage

Requirements:

Current State

Capability:

Data Protocols: Location Data

Format:

X, Y, Z Minimum

Operating Standards:

Common Cloud

Platform:

Map Composite

Engine:

Requirements to collect:

Standards to develop:

Technological Capabilities to build:

Measurement Capabilities to deploy:

Tactical public safety units

responsible for coordinating

across agencies and

disciplines as well as

technology hardware and

application providers across

the public safety domain

Summary: First responders require a common, interoperable LBS framework moving from data collection (wearables & sensors) to display devices to

mapping and logistical planning. Public safety requires a framework for testing and certification (software development kit/location toolkit) to enable

development.

(1) Proprietary solutions; sophisticated but lack incentives to share

information

(2) Computational complexity; disparate data forms and chart data

(3) Lack of interoperability between networks; inability for wifi,

Bluetooth, LTE to handoff communications in-buildings

(1) Closed or proprietary solution fails to evolve:

public safety becomes 'locked in' to solution that is

surpassed by emerging technologies

(2) Proliferation of technology: development of

incompatible solutions

Current State

Impacts

Development

Enablers Future State

Technical Barriers Potential Disruptors

'Public Safety' Specifications:

Gather public safety specific

operating requirements to

distinguish from existing

promulgated private sector

reqs

Aim to deploy a local

control LBS system that

'syncs' with master LBS

data in the cloud

Federated Data

System:

Roadmap for mapping

capability progress

(requirements, standards,

testing) against

promulgated timeline

Progress Milestones:
Who?

What?

Public Safety Operations:

Gap Stakeholders:

GAP: LBS Power Consumption

How?

Current technologies delivering relevant positioning data and location based services to mobile users drain battery at

an unsustainable rate, impeding adoption of LBS for public safety

Current Initiatives?

Public safety personnel that

currently use or would benefit

from LBS data on a mobile device

include law

enforcement/Fire/EMS, and

secondary responders

Public safety operations impacted

by this gap include search, rescue

and recover, incident command, command & control functions

High power consumption levels

result in shortened battery life on

devices utilizing LBS and contribute

to limited adoption of LBS

capabilities

Industry is leading battery life

innovation including developing

apps to reduce power

consumption. Apple is working on

doubling battery life in its next

generation of handsets

Identify number of battery life

hours per charge, time

required to recharge full

battery

Environment in which battery

is operable, i.e. temperature,

pressure, humidity, water

resistance, etc.

Dimensions and weight

required for operating in the

field environment.

Standard for indoor

localization systems installed in

buildings that do not require

public safety infrastructure

and equipment

Protocol for handoff

between cloud based maps

and core memory stored

maps

LBS app for public safety

smart phones that manages

and optimizes battery life

across device

Over the air power

sharing and charging for

public safety smart

phones and LBS devices

Ability to detect mission

critical environment and

prioritize communications

and LBS applications in

real time

Uniform system to

measure power

consumption by function

and by application

Measure delta between

power model simulations

and actual operational

environment testing

Public safety is able to move

from mission to mission

seamlessly with a single

device leveraging all valueadd data and functions from

the device simultaneously. Officers suffer from no gaps

in performance or accuracy

due to battery and/or power. Officers may rely on apps and

devices in more situations

due to improved device

stamina

Power/charge Metrics: Operating Conditions: Hardware Properties:

Localization Systems: Cloud/Local Handoff:

Power Management

Application:

Wireless Charging: Dynamic

Prioritization:

Power Consumption: Usage Testing:

Requirements to collect:

Standards to develop:

Technological Capabilities to build:

Measurement Capabilities to deploy:

Public safety officers who rely

on wireless technology to

perform duty functions.

Vendor and application

development community will

benefit from increased

demand for high-performing

technology and applications

(1) Form factor limitations

(2) Battery technology (does not follow Moore's Law)

(1) Emerging LBS technologies consumption may

outpace rate of battery performance improvement

Current State

Impacts

Development

Enablers Future State

Technical Barriers Potential Disruptors

Develop a 'rate of use'

protocol to serve as a

benchmark for Public Safety

market devices

Power

Consumption:

Summary: Intelligent LBS chip and application management is not driven by use case, role, situational awareness, status. etc. LBS today are too reliant on

GPS which has a variety of cons (including significant power consumption) and needs to be augmented by other LBS technologies. Maps today are not

cached on public safety devices, which forces reliance on the network, increasing power consumption. Persistent reliance on visual LBS user interfaces

drains power. There is a lack of practical alternatives to power intensive visual LBS user interfaces.

Indoor Localization

Testing:

Localization systems tested

in large buildings using

different construction

materials, various modes of

mobility, etc.
Who?

What?

Public Safety Operations:

Gap Stakeholders:

GAP: Standardization of LBS Capabilities

How?

Location information is not available, accessible, consumable, or sharable within and across public safety agencies due

to a lack of a uniform, interoperable, and secure framework for LBS

Current Initiatives?

Public safety entities and the

industry that builds tools to

support public safety operations

are effected, including: app

developers, hardware

manufacturers, product engineers, etc.

In addition to public safety

activities, public safety

administrative activities are

uniquely affected by this gap,

including finance, IT, and

communications

Applications and devices that will

increase efficiency and cohesion

within and between agencies are

not able to be developed on a

large scale, creating

communication gaps in incident

response and additional and

potentially duplicative

administrative tasks

Efforts include the FCC 4th Report

and Order, ATIS standards for

indoor location accuracy, DHS NICS

system, and 3GPP LBS Standard

Releases 12 & 13

Identify tools utilized in

operating environment to

share information (map

mark-up, chat across

agencies, etc.)

Gather public safety specific

operating requirements to

distinguish from existing

promulgated private sector

reqs

Snapshot of interfaces and

technologies used currently

to generate and display

location info and existing

protocols for interoperability

Consistent format for

Location data for

interoperability between

units and devices

Facilitate common LBS public

safety data and tasks

Ability to synch data, enduser sessions, etc. between

local LBS and cloud-based

LBS systems

LBS systems integrated

with communications

systems (i.e. application

layer receives data from

LTE network, attached

UEs location of towers)

Open source transport

layer protocols (i.e. expansion of WebRTC)

Verify that data is shared

only among authorities

(persons or organizations)

with access credentials

Measure that up-to-date

data is accessible as needed

and as authorized

Test authenticity,

reliability, and accuracy of

incoming LBS data

Public Safety is able to source

interoperable technologies

from a variety of vendors so

that all available data will be

input into an engine that can

modify the contextual

environment in real-time and

provide reliable information

to users of the information.

Public safety agencies across

the nation improve decision

making, training, efficiency,

coordination, resulting in

saved lives and property

Collaborative Tools: 'Public Safety'

Specifications:

Baseline Capability:

Location Data

Format:

Emergency

Management API:

Cloud

Synchronization:

LBS-LTE Integration: Open Source

Protocols:

Confidentiality: Recency Integrity:

Requirements to collect:

Standards to develop:

Technological Capabilities to build:

Measurement Capabilities to deploy:

Public safety units

responsible for tactical

coordination and/or logistics

and event planning will

benefit greatly from

standardization, including

administrators who purchase

and communicate across

agencies

(1) Proprietary technology: currently built by vendors, may

be difficult to migrate to standard

(2) Diverse system types: complicates standardization effort

(1) Internet of Things (commercial users saturate

spectrum)

(2) Advanced mapping capability

Current State

Impacts

Development

Enablers Future State

Technical Barriers Potential Disruptors

Consistent process and

governance for raw

information handling (x,y,z,

motion, environment, wind,

etc.)

Data Protocols:
Who?

What?

Public Safety Operations:

Gap Stakeholders:

GAP: Location-Enabled Wearable Devices

How?

Location-enabled wearable devices and/or sensors are not currently designed to or capable of operating in all

environmental conditions

Current Initiatives?

Public safety officers in the

operational environment and their

associated command and control

elements

Public safety operational activities

are affected as well as entities who

require live data and intelligence to

effectively execute the mission.

Also affected are

administrative/logistic planning

elements who rely on a common

and total picture of the operating

environment.

The lack of LBS wearable devices

limits LBS from acting as a

functional resource in the field.

Operational officers lack live data

and intelligence and command and

control elements lack the

intelligence to best deploy and

protect public safety resources.

DHS is currently conducting a 'First

Responder Wearables' research

project

Group of data sets that will

be required for live feedback

to the user in the field:

location data, biometrics, video, etc.

Environment in which device is

operable, i.e. temperature,

pressure, humidity, water

resistance, etc.

Dimensions, ruggedness,

and weight required for

operating in the field

environment.

Protocols and data formats

for Internet of Things

specific to public safety

wearable devices.

Need to blend/incorporate

existing standards sets for

IoT/M2M (OneM2M and

public safety

communications standards)

Use of range/azimuth as

tool to find users in areas

that have no network

access/coverage

Positioning calculations

using public safety

vehicles

Physical sensors that can

operate in public safety

environment, sense and

categorize data, and

transmit data to networks

Mobility of deployed

devices needs to be

measured for uncertainty

On-body sensors gather

critical data points from the

person and/or robot and the

environment. This keeps the

user safe through live alerts &

3D situational awareness and

provides better tactical

coordination through a total

view of the operating

environment at mission

command and control.

Mission Critical Data: Operating Conditions: Physical Properties:

Internet of Things

Protocol:

Standards

Integration:

Beacon System: Relative Positioning: IoT Sensors:

Requirements to collect:

Standards to develop:

Technological Capabilities to build:

Measurement Capabilities to deploy:

Public safety officers in ther

operational environment as

well as private users, DoD,

and workers in the chemical,

utility, and manufacturing

industries' plant workers.

(1) Radio interference between devices

(2) Thermal and high temperature effects on electronics

(3) Size of devices and wearables

(4) Battery life for wearables

(1) Wireless technology that allows non-rugged

devices to sit in safe places (inside gear, inside

vehicle)

Current State

Impacts

Development

Enablers Future State

Technical Barriers Potential Disruptors

Consistent terminology for

describing impact,

smoke/particle resistance,

etc.

Measurement Units:

Summary: Devices and/or sensors are not designed to meet a tiered set of public safety specific requirements which address ruggedization, usability,

operability, redundancy, mapping data, on/off network, user/command interfaces, and positional capabilities.

Mobility:
Acronyms Used

3GPP

AoA

ATIS

BT

CAD

DHS

DOP

DOT

EMS

FCC

EMS

IoT

LTE

LTE-U

M2M

NICS

OTDOA

RSS

TCS

TOA

UE

UWB

Third Generation Partnership Project

Angle of Arrival

Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions

Bluetooth

Computer Aided Design

Department of Homeland Security

Dilution of Precision

Department of Transportation

Emergency Medical Services

Federal Communications Commission

Emergency Medical Services

Internet of Things

Long Term Evolution

Long Term Evolution in Unlicensed spectrum

Machine to Machine

Next Generation Incident Command System

Observed Time Difference of Arrival

Rich Site Summary

Comtech TeleCommunication Systems, Inc. Time of Arrival

User Equipment

Ultra-wideband