<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Data Quality - RFID News</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.rfidnews.co.uk/tag/data-quality/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.rfidnews.co.uk</link>
	<description>New RFID Implementations, Hardware and Tags</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2026 06:45:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-GB</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>RFID Data Quality: Garbage In, Garbage Out</title>
		<link>https://www.rfidnews.co.uk/2026/07/13/rfid-data-quality-garbage-in-garbage-out/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=rfid-data-quality-garbage-in-garbage-out</link>
					<comments>https://www.rfidnews.co.uk/2026/07/13/rfid-data-quality-garbage-in-garbage-out/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Matt Houldsworth]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2026 06:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Article]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Asset Tracking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Logistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Retail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RFID Readers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Software]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[asset tracking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Quality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[logistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[retail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UHF]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.rfidnews.co.uk/?p=550</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Every RFID deployment generates mountains of raw data. Readers fire thousands of interrogation cycles per second, each one producing tag observations that feed into your middleware and business systems. But here is the uncomfortable truth: not all of that data is accurate, and if you are not filtering it properly, your entire operation is built on a shaky foundation. The principle is simple and unforgiving. Poor data in means poor decisions out. Let&#8217;s look at [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://www.rfidnews.co.uk/2026/07/13/rfid-data-quality-garbage-in-garbage-out/">RFID Data Quality: Garbage In, Garbage Out</a> first appeared on <a href="https://www.rfidnews.co.uk">RFID News</a>.</p>]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Every RFID deployment generates mountains of raw data. Readers fire thousands of interrogation cycles per second, each one producing tag observations that feed into your middleware and business systems. But here is the uncomfortable truth: not all of that data is accurate, and if you are not filtering it properly, your entire operation is built on a shaky foundation.</p>
<p>The principle is simple and unforgiving. Poor data in means poor decisions out. Let&#8217;s look at the most common data quality problems in RFID systems and the strategies that actually work to fix them.</p>
<h2>The Usual Suspects</h2>
<p>Phantom reads are arguably the most frustrating issue. These occur when a reader reports a tag that is not actually in the read zone. Reflective surfaces, multipath interference, and cross-read from adjacent zones all contribute. Your system thinks an item is present when it is not, leading to inventory inaccuracies and false triggers in automated workflows.</p>
<p>Missed reads are the opposite problem. A tag passes through the interrogation zone but the reader fails to capture it. This happens due to tag orientation, RF absorption by materials (liquids and metals are notorious), tag-to-tag coupling in dense populations, or simply insufficient dwell time in the read field. In supply chain applications, a single missed read can mean a lost carton.</p>
<p>Duplicate events flood your system with redundant observations. A stationary tagged item sitting near a reader portal will generate repeated read events, sometimes hundreds per minute. Without deduplication logic, downstream systems process the same item over and over, skewing counts and wasting processing cycles.</p>
<p>Stale data lingers when your system fails to recognise that a tag has left the read zone. The item has physically moved on, but the database still shows it at the last known location. This is particularly damaging in real-time location systems (RTLS) and work-in-progress tracking where timing matters.</p>
<h2>Filtering Strategies That Work</h2>
<p>The first line of defence sits in your RFID middleware. Time-window filtering groups rapid successive reads of the same EPC into a single event. A typical approach uses a sliding window of 2 to 5 seconds, collapsing all observations of a given tag within that window into one confirmed read. This eliminates the bulk of duplicate events immediately.</p>
<p>For phantom reads, RSSI thresholding is essential. By setting a minimum received signal strength indicator value, you discard weak signals that are likely reflections or cross-reads rather than legitimate tag presences. Combining RSSI thresholds with read-count minimums (requiring a tag to be seen at least 3 times within a window before confirming presence) dramatically reduces false positives.</p>
<p>Confidence scoring takes this further. Rather than treating every read as a binary event, assign a probability score based on multiple factors: RSSI consistency, read count, antenna sector, time of day patterns, and historical behaviour for that location. A tag seen 15 times at strong signal strength across two antenna ports scores much higher than a single weak observation on one port. Only events that cross your confidence threshold get promoted to business events.</p>
<h2>Data Cleansing at the Edge</h2>
<p>Modern deployments increasingly push cleansing logic to edge controllers rather than relying solely on centralised middleware. This reduces the volume of raw data hitting your network and speeds up decision-making. Edge-based rules engines can apply filtering, deduplication, and basic confidence scoring before data ever leaves the reader infrastructure.</p>
<p>For stale data, implement explicit timeout policies. If a tag has not been observed within a defined period (tuned to your specific use case), mark it as departed. Pair this with directional antenna configurations or transition detection logic to confirm movement events rather than relying on the absence of reads alone.</p>
<h2>The Bottom Line</h2>
<p>RFID hardware will never deliver perfect data. The physics of radio frequency communication guarantee some level of noise and uncertainty. What separates a reliable deployment from a frustrating one is not the choice of reader or tag. It is the data quality layer you build between raw observations and business logic. Invest in robust filtering, confidence scoring, and cleansing strategies, and your RFID data becomes a trusted asset rather than an expensive liability.</p><p>The post <a href="https://www.rfidnews.co.uk/2026/07/13/rfid-data-quality-garbage-in-garbage-out/">RFID Data Quality: Garbage In, Garbage Out</a> first appeared on <a href="https://www.rfidnews.co.uk">RFID News</a>.</p>]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.rfidnews.co.uk/2026/07/13/rfid-data-quality-garbage-in-garbage-out/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
