MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046350116 · doi:10.1002/rob.21412

Field testing of visual odometry aided by a sun sensor and inclinometer

2012· article· en· W2046350116 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Andrew Lambert, Paul Furgale, Timothy D. Barfoot, John Enright

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Field Robotics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsInclinometerOdometryVisual odometryComputer visionArtificial intelligenceOdometerComputer scienceInertial measurement unitRemote sensingGeologyGeodesyRobotMobile robot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper, we present a novel approach to planetary rover localization that incorporates sun sensor and inclinometer data directly into a stereo visual odometry pipeline. Utilizing the absolute orientation information provided by the sun sensor and inclinometer significantly reduces the error growth of the visual odometry path estimate. The measurements have very low computation, power, and mass requirements, providing localization improvement at nearly negligible cost. We describe the mathematical formulation of error terms for the stereo camera, sun sensor, and inclinometer measurements, as well as the bundle adjustment framework for determining the maximum likelihood vehicle transformation. Extensive results are presented from experimental trials utilizing data collected during a 10‐km traversal of a Mars analogue site on Devon Island in the Canadian high Arctic. We also illustrate how our approach can be used to reduce the computational burden of visual odometry for planetary exploration missions. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations40
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Field RoboticsSame topicRobotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationFrench-language works237,207