MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021558736 · doi:10.2514/1.59052

Invariant Trapezoidal Kalman Filter for Application to Attitude Estimation

2013· article· en· W2021558736 on OpenAlexaff
Sven Mikael Persson, Inna Sharf

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Guidance Control and Dynamics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInertial Sensor and Navigation
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKalman filterCovarianceInvariant (physics)MathematicsEstimatorControl theory (sociology)Invariant extended Kalman filterExtended Kalman filterApplied mathematicsComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper incorporates formal concepts of invariance of numerical integration schemes into the design of Kalman filters. In general terms, invariant discretizations of dynamical systems can form the basis for the derivation of the covariance propagation during the prediction and update phases of a Kalman filter, and this paper presents a framework to that effect. Specifically, natural invariants of angular motion are introduced, as part of a symmetry-preserving trapezoidal integration rule, to form the basis for the derivation of a discrete-time invariant Kalman filter for an attitude estimation problem. The proposed filter is realized by expressing all zero-mean random variables in the Lie algebra, while the state manipulations are performed in special orthogonal group 3. Simulation and experimental results are obtained using a neutrally buoyant spherical blimp to validate the proposed method against state-of-the-art Kalman filters in a broad range of angular speeds and sampling rates. Furthermore, the results support claims of invariance of the estimator with respect to angular speed, as well as the preservation of the system’s symmetries through the covariance calculations.

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: 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
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations9
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Guidance Control and DynamicsSame topicInertial Sensor and NavigationFrench-language works237,207