Beacons Used to Detect Owner and Cat Interactions

A new recent paper, Cats and humans show correlated affiliative physiological states (Takagi et al., 2026), investigates whether cats and their owners share related hormonal states and whether physical proximity between them is associated with owners’ psychological wellbeing.

A particularly interesting aspect is the use of Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) beacons to objectively measure how close cats and their owners were during everyday life, rather than relying on questionnaires or owners’ recollections.


The researchers studied 29 cats belonging to 19 owners over a one-month period. Each cat wore a small BLE beacon continuously, 24 hours a day, for one month. The beacons were attached either in a protective case fitted to a standard collar or incorporated into a modified bandana-style collar.

Each owner received a dedicated smartphone running a custom-developed application that recorded the Bluetooth signal strength received from their cat’s beacon. The owners were instructed to carry the smartphone while at home, switch it off and leave it near the entrance when going out, and switch it back on when returning. Overnight, the phone was charged near their usual sleeping position.

The system therefore measured proximity between the cat’s collar and the owner’s smartphone during periods when the owner was at home, rather than continuously tracking the cat’s geographical location.

The researchers used Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI) measurements, expressed in decibel-milliwatts (dBm), as an indicator of distance. Readings weaker than −90 dBm were discarded because the researchers considered them unreliable indicators of distance. Rather than converting the readings into precise distances in metres, the researchers calculated the median RSSI value for each cat-owner pair across the month. This produced a single proximity measure for each pair, with higher RSSI values indicating closer proximity. Using the median helped reduce the influence of fluctuations and noise in the Bluetooth measurements.

The most important beacon-related finding was that closer physical proximity between owners and their cats was associated with higher scores for Vigor-Activity, a psychological measure reflecting energy, enthusiasm and vitality. The reported standardised association was 0.46, with a 95% credible interval of 0.12 to 0.82. The relationship remained supported when the researchers repeated the analysis at household level (0.55, 95% credible interval 0.11 to 0.99).

By contrast, the length of time someone had owned their cat did not show a similarly robust association with positive mood. This suggests that everyday closeness to a cat may be more relevant to an owner’s positive emotional state than simply having lived with the animal for a long period.

Alongside the Bluetooth monitoring, the researchers collected urine samples to measure oxytocin, associated with social bonding, and cortisol, associated with stress. They found that owners and cats had positively correlated oxytocin concentrations. Higher cat oxytocin was also associated with lower owner cortisol and several measures of reduced negative mood. A separate behavioural test indicated that cats with higher oxytocin levels were more likely to approach people.

The main conclusion is that Bluetooth beacons provided a practical way to measure everyday physical closeness between cats and humans, and that this closeness was associated with greater owner vitality. The findings support the value of objective proximity monitoring in human-animal interaction research.

Nordic Wireless Quarter

Nordic Semiconductor, a leading manufacturer of System-on-Chip (SoC) technology widely used in beacon devices and a major supplier of Bluetooth Low Energy (LE) solutions, has released the latest PDF edition of its free Wireless Quarter Magazine.

The latest issue highlights the diverse and expanding range of applications powered by Nordic’s innovative wireless technology. Featuring industry insights, real-world applications and emerging developments, the magazine explores how Nordic’s SoCs are enabling smarter, more efficient and connected solutions across multiple sectors.

Some SoC-based solutions mentioned include:

  • A new Bluetooth ECG device
  • A new Bluetooth LE relay beacon from Minew
  • A Bluetooth LE Audio device for vascular surgeons
  • A Bluetooth LE monitoring solution for perishables
  • A new solution that keeps perishables in check

The latest issue also features articles exploring the key trends shaping Bluetooth Low Energy (LE) development in 2026 and beyond, alongside the growing importance of the Intelligence of Things and Edge AI in enabling smarter, more autonomous connected devices. Another article examines the implications of the EU Cyber Resilience Act, highlighting the new cybersecurity requirements that manufacturers will need to address to ensure their connected products comply with the legislation.

Do You Have a Beacon That Makes a Sound When You Are Near?

The quick answer is no.

The longer answer is that beacons don’t know if anyone is near because they are not doing the listening. They just send out information. It’s possible to have a smartphone app see the beacon and the phone make a sound.

There are different consumer ‘tracker’ type Bluetooth devices, that we don’t sell, to which an app can connect rather than just detect. Once connected, the app can cause the beacon to ring. However, only one app user can connect at a time. Also, the ringing and constant connection means the tracker battery doesn’t last very long.

Low Cost Indoor Robot Navigation Using Bluetooth LE RSSI

New research looks into a low cost indoor robot navigation system that combines Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE), obstacle detection and camera-based guidance. The system aims to provide an affordable alternative to expensive LiDAR and GPS-based navigation, particularly for applications such as hospital assistance and indoor deliveries.

The robot uses Bluetooth signal strength (RSSI) to navigate towards a target. Signal filtering reduces interference, while a finite state machine controls movement and helps the robot recover when signals become unreliable or obstacles are detected. Ultrasonic sensors, a gyroscope and ArUco visual markers provide additional navigation support.

Experimental results showed a 100% success rate across 13 Bluetooth navigation trials, with an average navigation time of 143.4 seconds. However, testing was limited to a controlled indoor environment, and the Bluetooth and vision systems were evaluated separately.

The study demonstrates that inexpensive sensors can support effective indoor navigation.

Can USB Beacons Receive Beacon Transmissions?

You might wonder whether USB beacons can be used to enable desktops/laptops or any USB device to receive beacon transmissions. USB beacons don’t work this way and only use the USB connection for power.

What you need is a ‘Sniffer’ such as the ABSniffer 528. It scans for Bluetooth devices and sends the data via USB to the device powering it.

ABSniffer 528

Alternatively, look for a standard Bluetooth dongle that that supports Bluetooth Low Energy (LE) and an associated programming API for ESP32, Raspberry Pi, Windows or Linux.

Checking Detected Locations in Security Sensitive Applications

A new paper, PrivacyShield: Relaying BLE Beacons to Counter Unsolicited Tracking, proposes a way to make hidden Bluetooth trackers less useful to stalkers by causing them to appear in other locations. It presents a working research prototype, tested mainly against Apple’s AirTags and Find My network.



The underlying problem is that these tracking networks enlist nearby phones to report a tag’s location, potentially including the victim’s own phone. The authors argue that existing anti-stalking measures offer insufficient protection. Alerts take time to appear, speakers can be disabled, and modified trackers can evade detection by changing their identifiers or pretending to be another type of device.

PrivacyShield captures nearby tags’ Bluetooth broadcasts and sends them over the internet to relay stations elsewhere. Those stations rebroadcast the signals, prompting nearby phones to report the tag at the relay’s location. This exploits the network’s inability to distinguish an original broadcast from a relayed copy. The prototype uses a modified Android app, a server and inexpensive ESP32 hardware, without requiring Apple’s cooperation or physical access to the hidden tracker.

In experiments with locations roughly four kilometres apart, the researchers made Apple’s Find My app display an AirTag at the relay location. With one reporting phone at each location, rebroadcasting twice per second reliably produced the false location; slower rebroadcasting caused the displayed position to alternate or stop updating. Effectiveness depended on both broadcast frequency and the number of phones reporting each location.

The crucial limitation is that confusing the displayed location does not necessarily erase the real one and genuine location reports can remain available. A sophisticated attacker analysing all reports, or using prior knowledge of the victim’s movements, might distinguish real locations from decoys. The experiments are relatively small, and protection across other tracking networks is proposed rather than demonstrated to the same extent. The system also cannot protect against GPS trackers, can disrupt legitimate lost-item tracking and could be misused to conceal stolen belongings.

The authors therefore present PrivacyShield as a temporary defence while providers improve their systems. They recommend faster alerts, alerts covering all device types and stronger protocol-level protections. The paper’s main contribution is demonstrating that relaying tracker signals can give potential victims a practical means of disrupting surveillance, although it does not establish guaranteed protection against determined stalkers.

The same principle could apply to ordinary, non-proprietary Bluetooth Low Energy beacons where a receiving system treats a broadcast identifier as evidence of location or proximity. Capturing and rebroadcasting that signal elsewhere could create misleading detections, although the effect would depend on how the receiving system validates and processes them. The broader lesson for users and system designers is that detecting a beacon’s signal does not always, by itself, prove that the original device is physically nearby. More security sensitive applications need to do more checks.

Can an iBeacon Send Users to a Website?

The short answer is no, iBeacons cannot directly send users to a website. iBeacons do not have the capability to push content or URLs to devices automatically.

Instead, they rely on apps to detect their presence and take appropriate actions which can include sending the user to a web site. The app has to already be on the smartphone.

There used to be a mechanism in Android that used the Eddystone-URL advertising format but this has since been discontinued by Google.

Bluetooth Beacon-Based Child Boarding and Alighting Detection

A new study develops a safety system that uses Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) beacons to detect when a child boards or leaves a school transport vehicle. Each child carries a small BLE beacon, while the teacher’s smartphone or tablet continuously scans for its signal. The system uses the beacon’s unique address to identify the child and then sends the boarding or alighting status to the parent’s phone through a push notification.


The beacon is used mainly as a proximity sensor rather than for precise positioning. The system measures RSSI, which represents the strength of the Bluetooth signal received by the teacher’s device. A stronger signal generally means the beacon is closer, while a weaker signal suggests it is further away. Because RSSI can fluctuate due to distance, vehicle layout, obstacles and orientation, the researchers do not rely on a single signal-strength threshold. Instead, they analyse ten recent RSSI readings and calculate the average, trend and variance. A lightweight logistic-regression model then decides whether the child has boarded or left the vehicle.

The system was tested in three vehicle sizes. A conventional fixed RSSI threshold worked well within about four metres, but accuracy declined at longer distances. The machine-learning approach improved accuracy from 88% to 94% at 4–5 metres and from 76% to 87% beyond five metres.

Overall, the research shows how simple, low-cost BLE beacons can be used for automatic boarding and alighting detection without modifying the vehicle or requiring the child or teacher to scan or press anything. The main limitation is that Bluetooth signal strength becomes less reliable over longer distances, so vehicle-specific calibration is still required.

How Many Connections Can an iBeacon Support?

We sometimes get asked how many connections an iBeacon can support? The answer is ‘1’ but it’s often the right answer to the wrong intended question! The intended question is usually “How many receivers can see a beacon?”

Beacons don’t usually connect. They just advertise and can be seen by a very large number of receivers that include phones, gateways or single board computers such as the Raspberry Pi. The beacon doesn’t even know the receivers are there.

The receivers only usually connect once, during setup via an app, to set the initial beacon parameters. When connected, the beacon doesn’t advertise which prevents extra receivers from connecting. Once set up, the app disconnects and the beacon starts advertising again.

In some extreme situations, radio congestion can affect how many receivers can see a beacon.

Which Beacons are Compatible with iOS and Android?

We often get asked the question which beacons are compatible with iOS and Android. All beacons, whether iBeacon, Eddystone or sensor beacons can be used with iOS and Android. The compatibility is achieved through the implementation of common Bluetooth standards on these mobile platforms.

However, there are some caveats:

  • Android only supported Bluetooth LE as of Android 4.3. Older devices can’t see Bluetooth beacons. Over 99% of users are on Android 4.3 or later so most people can see beacons.
  • Apple iOS doesn’t have background OS support for Eddystone triggering. While iOS apps can scan for, see and act on Eddystone beacons, the iOS operating system won’t create a notification to start up your app when there’s an Eddystone beacon in the vicinity.
  • Apple can’t see beacon’s or other Bluetooth devices’ MAC address or iBeacon ids due to over zealous privacy concerns. It can see iBeacons but you have to pre-declare, already know, their ids.

Rather than beacons being compatible with iOS/Android, we find that there are more problems with particular Android devices not seeing beacons, when in background, due to some manufacturers killing background services.

Also see Which Beacon’s Are the Most Compatible?

View iBeacons