A Novel Artificial Fish Swarm Algorithm for Recalibration of Fiber Optic Gyroscope Error Parameters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The artificial fish swarm algorithm (AFSA) is one of the state-of-the-art swarm intelligent techniques, which is widely utilized for optimization purposes. Fiber optic gyroscope (FOG) error parameters such as scale factors, biases and misalignment errors are relatively unstable, especially with the environmental disturbances and the aging of fiber coils. These uncalibrated error parameters are the main reasons that the precision of FOG-based strapdown inertial navigation system (SINS) degraded. This research is mainly on the application of a novel artificial fish swarm algorithm (NAFSA) on FOG error coefficients recalibration/identification. First, the NAFSA avoided the demerits (e.g., lack of using artificial fishes' pervious experiences, lack of existing balance between exploration and exploitation, and high computational cost) of the standard AFSA during the optimization process. To solve these weak points, functional behaviors and the overall procedures of AFSA have been improved with some parameters eliminated and several supplementary parameters added. Second, a hybrid FOG error coefficients recalibration algorithm has been proposed based on NAFSA and Monte Carlo simulation (MCS) approaches. This combination leads to maximum utilization of the involved approaches for FOG error coefficients recalibration. After that, the NAFSA is verified with simulation and experiments and its priorities are compared with that of the conventional calibration method and optimal AFSA. Results demonstrate high efficiency of the NAFSA on FOG error coefficients recalibration.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".