MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fastening tool tracking system using a Kalman filter and particle filter combination

2011· article· en· W2021442039 on OpenAlexaff
Seong-hoon Peter Won, William Melek, Farid Golnaraghi

Bibliographic record

VenueMeasurement Science and Technology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Measurement and Metrology Techniques
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInertial measurement unitKalman filterParticle filterPosition (finance)Tracking (education)Orientation (vector space)Computer scienceTracking systemControl theory (sociology)Extended Kalman filterAngular velocityComputer visionArtificial intelligencePhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a position tracking system which estimates the position of the tip of a fastening tool. The proposed system uses a Kalman filter (KF) and particle filter (PF) combination to synthesize measurements from an inertial measurement unit (IMU) and a position sensor. The KF part is used to estimate the position of the centre of mass of the tool, and the PF is used to estimate the orientation of the tool. In addition, a rule-based logic system is used to reduce angular velocity measurement error and identify the fastening action of the tool. The proposed system was validated experimentally using various scenarios representative of assembly tasks in a factory environment. The experiment results show that the proposed system can accurately identify the fastened bolt even when the angular velocity measurement is not accurate provided that a large enough number of particles is used. In addition, even when there are multiple possibilities for fastened bolt positions, the experimental results show that the proposed system can correctly identify the fastened bolt by utilizing the accumulated position error of each particle.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.165 · 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

Citations22
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMeasurement Science and TechnologySame topicAdvanced Measurement and Metrology TechniquesFrench-language works237,207