I want to process the value from InfluxDB on Grafana.
The final demand is to show how many miles the current vehicle has traveled in a certain time frame.
You can use the formula: average velocity * time.
Do the seniors have any good methods?
So what I'm thinking is: I've got the mean function for the average speed over a fixed period of time and the corresponding mileage, and then I want to add all the mileage together. How do I do that?
What if you only use SQL?
1.) InfluxDB uses InfluxQL, not a SQL
2.) Your approach average velocity * time is innacurate
3.) Use suitable InfluxDB functions, I would say INTEGRAL() is the best function for this case + some basic arithmetic. Don't expect the 100% accuracy. Accuracy depends heavily on the metric sampling, e.g. 1 minute sampling - but what if vehicle is driving 59 seconds and it is not moving for that second when sampling is happening. So don't be supprised, when even 10 sec sampling will be inacurrate.
What Prometheus query (PromQl) can be used to identify the last local peak value in the last X minutes in a graph?
A local peak is a point that is larger than its previous and next datapoint. (So the current time is definitely not a local peak)
(p: peak point, i: cornjob interval, m: missed execuation)
I want this value to find an anomaly in the execution of a cron job. As you can see in the picture, I have written a query to calculate the elapsed time since the last execution of a job. Now to set an alert rule to calculate the elapsed time from the last successful execution and find missed execution, I need the amount of time that the last execution of the job occurred in that interval. This interval is unknown for the query (In other words, the interval of the job is specified by another program), so I can not compare elapsed time with a fixed time.
Use z-score to detecting anomalies
If you know the average value and standard deviation (σ) of a series, you can use any sample in the series to calculate the z-score. The z-score is measured in the number of standard deviations from the mean. So a z-score of 0 would mean the z-score is identical to the mean in a data set with a normal distribution, while a z-score of 1 is 1.0 σ from the mean, etc.
Calculate the average and standard deviation for the metric using data with large sample size.
# Long-term average value for the series
- record: job:cronjob_duration_time_seconds_count:rate10m:avg_over_time_1w
expr: avg_over_time(sum(rate(cronjob_duration_time_seconds_count[10m]))[1w:])
# Long-term standard deviation for the series
- record: job:cronjob_duration_time_seconds_count:rate5m:stddev_over_time_1w
expr: stddev_over_time(sum(rate(cronjob_duration_time_seconds_count[10m]))[1w:])
calculate the z-score for the Prometheus query once you have the average and standard deviation for the aggregation.
# Z-Score for aggregation
(
job:cronjob_duration_time_seconds_count:rate10m -
job:cronjob_duration_time_seconds_count:rate10m:avg_over_time_1w
) / stddev_over_time(sum(rate(cronjob_duration_time_seconds_count[10m]))[1w:])
Based on the statistical principles of normal distributions, you can assume that any value that falls outside of the range of roughly +1 to -1 is an anomaly. For example, you can get an alert when our aggregation is out of this range for more than five minutes.
If what you want is an alert to be fired when the elapsed time has been longer than a fixed duration, you can set an alert similar to the up alert, based on the changes > 0 expression, which is only true (i.e. > 0) when the job is running.
An example would be:
rules:
- alert: CronJobNotRunning
expr: |
changes(
sum(
rate(
cronjob_duration_time_seconds_count{
status="ok", namespace="<namespace>", exported_job="<job>"
}[1m]
)
)[1m:]
) == 0
for: <alert_duration>
Note that subqueries ([1m:]) are expensive, and introducing a recording rule there can help performance, especially in a dashboard.
Also, in your case, the time since the last time the second derivative was non-zero can be used too, as that happens when a job starts/finishes (the drops in the graph, or when it starts to rise).
I am wondering if the magnitude value of a CLLocationAccuracy object represents distance in meters. It is described like this in Xcode docs:
Description: The magnitude of this value. //this value being accuracy
value?
For any value x, x.magnitude.sign is .plus. If x is not NaN,
x.magnitude is the absolute value of x. The global abs(:) function
provides more familiar syntax when you need to find an absolute value.
In addition, because abs(:) always returns a value of the same type,
even in a generic context, using the function instead of the magnitude
property is encouraged.
Listing 1
let targetDistance: Double = 5.25
let throwDistance: Double = 5.5
let margin = targetDistance - throwDistance // margin == -0.25 //
margin.magnitude == 0.25
// Use 'abs(_:)' instead of 'magnitude' print("Missed the target by
(abs(margin)) meters.") // Prints "Missed the target by 0.25 meters."
How does the magnitude relate to distance, if at all? I can see that it is different from the raw proximity value because it goes higher than 3.
For example (from console output of testing):
[CLBeacon (uuid:12345678-B644-4520-8F0C-720EAF059935, major:1, minor:3, proximity:3 +/- 5.39m, rssi:-71)] //a beacon that is being ranged
major: 1
minor: 3
accuracy: 5.38695083568272
2.64546246474154 --- magnitude
You can see the accuracy is 5.3869... and the proximity value is 3...and magnitude is 2.6454 - how do they all relate?
The accuracy value attempts to estimate the distance form the beacon in meters. This was confirmed in a private Apple forum several years ago by an Apple support engineer, and it is consistent with my testing. The docs for the property say is is the "one sigma horizontal accuracy in meters where the measuring device's location is referenced at the beaconing device." This simply means that the best guess of iOS is that your distance from the beacon is about the accuracy value in meters.
The proximity value is simply an enumeration that represents the following values and their raw integer equivalents:
unknown 0
immediate 1
near 2
far 3
These are basically distance "buckets" derived from the accuracy field. An accuracy of 0-0.5 will give you an immediate proximity. An accuracy value of 0.5-3 meters will give you a near proximity and an accuracy value > 3 will give you far. Unknown is returned if the accuracy cannot be computed (it typically returns -1 in this case.)
The documentation shown in the question for "magnitude" is about a mathematical function related to absolute value. It has nothing to do with beacons and is not related to accuracy and proximity of a CLBeacon.
Accuracy is simply giving you a value on how accurate the data is.
At least for CLLocation we use different params such as kCLLocationAccuracyKilometer, among others. Docs at: CLLocation.desiredAccuracy
Proximity is an obvious one, how close you are to the beacon (proximity :3 +/- 5.39m) between 3 to 5.4 meters.
Magnitude in general terms is simply an absolute value, but unsure how it fits into your problem... pretty sure its useless unless someone can correct me.
Trying to grasp a basic concept of how distancing with ibeacon (beacon/ Bluetooth-lowenergy/BLE) can work. Is there any true documentation on how far exactly an ibeacon can measure. Lets say I am 300 feet away...is it possible for an ibeacon to detect this?
Specifically for v4 &. v5 and with iOS but generally any BLE device.
How does Bluetooth frequency & throughput affect this? Can beacon devices enhance or restrict the distance / improve upon underlying BLE?
ie
| Range | Freq | T/sec | Topo |
|–—–––––––––––|–—––––––––––|–—––––––––––|–—––––––––––|
Bluetooth v2.1 | Up to 100 m | < 2.481ghz | < 2.1mbit | scatternet |
|-------------|------------|------------|------------|
Bluetooth v4 | ? | < 2.481ghz | < 305kbit | mesh |
|-------------|------------|------------|------------|
Bluetooth v5 | ? | < 2.481ghz | < 1306kbit | mesh |
The distance estimate provided by iOS is based on the ratio of the beacon signal strength (rssi) over the calibrated transmitter power (txPower). The txPower is the known measured signal strength in rssi at 1 meter away. Each beacon must be calibrated with this txPower value to allow accurate distance estimates.
While the distance estimates are useful, they are not perfect, and require that you control for other variables. Be sure you read up on the complexities and limitations before misusing this.
When we were building the Android iBeacon library, we had to come up with our own independent algorithm because the iOS CoreLocation source code is not available. We measured a bunch of rssi measurements at known distances, then did a best fit curve to match our data points. The algorithm we came up with is shown below as Java code.
Note that the term "accuracy" here is iOS speak for distance in meters. This formula isn't perfect, but it roughly approximates what iOS does.
protected static double calculateAccuracy(int txPower, double rssi) {
if (rssi == 0) {
return -1.0; // if we cannot determine accuracy, return -1.
}
double ratio = rssi*1.0/txPower;
if (ratio < 1.0) {
return Math.pow(ratio,10);
}
else {
double accuracy = (0.89976)*Math.pow(ratio,7.7095) + 0.111;
return accuracy;
}
}
Note: The values 0.89976, 7.7095 and 0.111 are the three constants calculated when solving for a best fit curve to our measured data points. YMMV
I'm very thoroughly investigating the matter of accuracy/rssi/proximity with iBeacons and I really really think that all the resources in the Internet (blogs, posts in StackOverflow) get it wrong.
davidgyoung (accepted answer, > 100 upvotes) says:
Note that the term "accuracy" here is iOS speak for distance in meters.
Actually, most people say this but I have no idea why! Documentation makes it very very clear that CLBeacon.proximity:
Indicates the one sigma horizontal accuracy in meters. Use this property to differentiate between beacons with the same proximity value. Do not use it to identify a precise location for the beacon. Accuracy values may fluctuate due to RF interference.
Let me repeat: one sigma accuracy in meters. All 10 top pages in google on the subject has term "one sigma" only in quotation from docs, but none of them analyses the term, which is core to understand this.
Very important is to explain what is actually one sigma accuracy. Following URLs to start with: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_error, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty
In physical world, when you make some measurement, you always get different results (because of noise, distortion, etc) and very often results form Gaussian distribution. There are two main parameters describing Gaussian curve:
mean (which is easy to understand, it's value for which peak of the curve occurs).
standard deviation, which says how wide or narrow the curve is. The narrower curve, the better accuracy, because all results are close to each other. If curve is wide and not steep, then it means that measurements of the same phenomenon differ very much from each other, so measurement has a bad quality.
one sigma is another way to describe how narrow/wide is gaussian curve.
It simply says that if mean of measurement is X, and one sigma is σ, then 68% of all measurements will be between X - σ and X + σ.
Example. We measure distance and get a gaussian distribution as a result. The mean is 10m. If σ is 4m, then it means that 68% of measurements were between 6m and 14m.
When we measure distance with beacons, we get RSSI and 1-meter calibration value, which allow us to measure distance in meters. But every measurement gives different values, which form gaussian curve. And one sigma (and accuracy) is accuracy of the measurement, not distance!
It may be misleading, because when we move beacon further away, one sigma actually increases because signal is worse. But with different beacon power-levels we can get totally different accuracy values without actually changing distance. The higher power, the less error.
There is a blog post which thoroughly analyses the matter: http://blog.shinetech.com/2014/02/17/the-beacon-experiments-low-energy-bluetooth-devices-in-action/
Author has a hypothesis that accuracy is actually distance. He claims that beacons from Kontakt.io are faulty beacuse when he increased power to the max value, accuracy value was very small for 1, 5 and even 15 meters. Before increasing power, accuracy was quite close to the distance values. I personally think that it's correct, because the higher power level, the less impact of interference. And it's strange why Estimote beacons don't behave this way.
I'm not saying I'm 100% right, but apart from being iOS developer I have degree in wireless electronics and I think that we shouldn't ignore "one sigma" term from docs and I would like to start discussion about it.
It may be possible that Apple's algorithm for accuracy just collects recent measurements and analyses the gaussian distribution of them. And that's how it sets accuracy. I wouldn't exclude possibility that they use info form accelerometer to detect whether user is moving (and how fast) in order to reset the previous distribution distance values because they have certainly changed.
The iBeacon output power is measured (calibrated) at a distance of 1 meter. Let's suppose that this is -59 dBm (just an example). The iBeacon will include this number as part of its LE advertisment.
The listening device (iPhone, etc), will measure the RSSI of the device. Let's suppose, for example, that this is, say, -72 dBm.
Since these numbers are in dBm, the ratio of the power is actually the difference in dB. So:
ratio_dB = txCalibratedPower - RSSI
To convert that into a linear ratio, we use the standard formula for dB:
ratio_linear = 10 ^ (ratio_dB / 10)
If we assume conservation of energy, then the signal strength must fall off as 1/r^2. So:
power = power_at_1_meter / r^2. Solving for r, we get:
r = sqrt(ratio_linear)
In Javascript, the code would look like this:
function getRange(txCalibratedPower, rssi) {
var ratio_db = txCalibratedPower - rssi;
var ratio_linear = Math.pow(10, ratio_db / 10);
var r = Math.sqrt(ratio_linear);
return r;
}
Note, that, if you're inside a steel building, then perhaps there will be internal reflections that make the signal decay slower than 1/r^2. If the signal passes through a human body (water) then the signal will be attenuated. It's very likely that the antenna doesn't have equal gain in all directions. Metal objects in the room may create strange interference patterns. Etc, etc... YMMV.
iBeacon uses Bluetooth Low Energy(LE) to keep aware of locations, and the distance/range of Bluetooth LE is 160ft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluetooth_low_energy).
Distances to the source of iBeacon-formatted advertisement packets are estimated from the signal path attenuation calculated by comparing the measured received signal strength to the claimed transmit power which the transmitter is supposed to encode in the advertising data.
A path loss based scheme like this is only approximate and is subject to variation with things like antenna angles, intervening objects, and presumably a noisy RF environment. In comparison, systems really designed for distance measurement (GPS, Radar, etc) rely on precise measurements of propagation time, in same cases even examining the phase of the signal.
As Jiaru points out, 160 ft is probably beyond the intended range, but that doesn't necessarily mean that a packet will never get through, only that one shouldn't expect it to work at that distance.
With multiple phones and beacons at the same location, it's going to be difficult to measure proximity with any high degree of accuracy. Try using the Android "b and l bluetooth le scanner" app, to visualize the signal strengths (distance) variations, for multiple beacons, and you'll quickly discover that complex, adaptive algorithms may be required to provide any form of consistent proximity measurement.
You're going to see lots of solutions simply instructing the user to "please hold your phone here", to reduce customer frustration.