MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001496915 · doi:10.1177/0278364913478672

Gaussian Process Gauss–Newton for non-parametric simultaneous localization and mapping

2013· article· en· W2001496915 on OpenAlexaff
Chi Hay Tong, Paul Furgale, Timothy D. Barfoot

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Robotics Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOdometryGaussian processGaussianSimultaneous localization and mappingRange (aeronautics)Parametric statisticsGaussAlgorithmComputer scienceMathematical optimizationMathematicsNonlinear systemArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present Gaussian Process Gauss–Newton (GPGN), an algorithm for non-parametric, continuous-time, nonlinear, batch state estimation. This work adapts the methods of Gaussian process (GP) regression to address the problem of batch simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM) by using the Gauss–Newton optimization method. In particular, we formulate the estimation problem with a continuous-time state model, along with the more conventional discrete-time measurements. Two derivations are presented in this paper, reflecting both the weight-space and function-space approaches from the GP regression literature. Validation is conducted through simulations and a hardware experiment, which utilizes the well-understood problem of two-dimensional SLAM as an illustrative example. The performance is compared with the traditional discrete-time batch Gauss–Newton approach, and we also show that GPGN can be employed to estimate motion with only range/bearing measurements of landmarks (i.e. no odometry), even when there are not enough measurements to constrain the pose at a given timestep.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations68
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of Robotics ResearchSame topicRobotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationFrench-language works237,207