MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1577567706 · doi:10.1109/wowmom.2015.7158210

Opportunistic calibration of smartphone orientation in a vehicle

2015· article· en· W1577567706 on OpenAlexaff
Bahador Khaleghi, A. El-ghazal, Allaa R. Hilal, Jason Toonstra, William B. Miners, Otman Basir

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety
Canadian institutionsIntelligent Mechatronic Systems (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelematicsAccelerometerGlobal Positioning SystemOrientation (vector space)Computer scienceGyroscopeCalibrationReal-time computingProcess (computing)Sensor fusionProbabilistic logicEmbedded systemArtificial intelligenceEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern smartphones are globally ubiquitous. As such, an increasing number of drivers have their smartphone in their vehicle while driving. These phones are equipped with powerful sensing, processing, and communication capabilities. This provides an opportunity to deploy smartphones in modern telematics and mobile telemetry technologies to enable the collection of driving data. Such data can be exploited to obtain insights regarding the vehicle driving patterns as well as the drivers' skills. These insights are valuable in many applications including the usage-based insurance, young driver coaching, and fleet management solutions. However, the sensory data provided by a smartphone must be reoriented with respect to the vehicle to be utilized in such applications. This requires the orientation of the smartphone relative to the vehicle reference system to be estimated through a calibration process. Furthermore, the orientation of a smartphone can vary at any time during a trip due to extraneous factors such as user interaction. This makes the orientation calibration process a challenging task. This paper describes an opportunistic calibration method that continuously monitors a smartphone orientation and compensates for its variation, as necessary. The proposed method relies on the probabilistic fusion of built-in sensors; in particular, the GPS, accelerometer, gyroscope, and magnetometer. The extensive experiments conducted using real-world driving data illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed opportunistic calibration method.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.767
Threshold uncertainty score0.154

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.201 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and SafetyFrench-language works237,207