MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051576605 · doi:10.1117/12.558493

A neural network model of optical gyros drift errors with application to vehicular navigation

2004· article· en· W2051576605 on OpenAlexafffund
Rashad Sharaf, Aboelmagd Noureldin

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Fiber Optic Sensors
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGyroscopeInertial navigation systemRing laser gyroscopeArtificial neural networkComputer scienceGlobal Positioning SystemAccelerometerNoise (video)Artificial intelligenceEngineeringInertial frame of referencePhysicsTelecommunicationsAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inertial navigation systems (INS) incorporating three mutually orthogonal accelerometers and three mutually orthogonal gyroscopes are integrated with global positioning systems (GPS) to provide reliable and accurate positioning information for vehicular navigation. Because of their high reliability and accuracy, ring laser gyroscopes (RLG) and fiber optic gyroscopes (FOG) are usually utilized inside most of the present INS. However, bias drift at the output of these optical gyroscopes may deteriorate the performance of the overall INS/GPS navigation system. This paper introduces a method to enhance the performance of optical gyros in two phases. The first phase utilizes wavelet multi-resolution analysis to band limit the gyro measurement and improves its signal-to-noise ratio. The second phase employs radial-basis function (RBF) neural networks to predict drift errors. The drift model provided by the RBF network is established using the gyro raw measurement and time as inputs and provides the drift error at its output. The RBF neural networks are utilized in this study since they generally have simpler architecture and faster training procedure than other neural network types. The proposed method is applied to E-core 2000 FOG (KVH Industries Inc., Rhode Island, USA).

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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.217
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

Citations7
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicAdvanced Fiber Optic SensorsFrench-language works237,207