MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089338360 · doi:10.1109/worv.2013.6521934

Automated tuning of the nonlinear complementary filter for an Attitude Heading Reference observer

2013· article· en· W2089338360 on OpenAlexaff
O. De Silva, George K. I. Mann, Raymond G. Gosine

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInertial Sensor and Navigation
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Attitude and heading reference systemExtended Kalman filterQuaternionRobustness (evolution)Inertial measurement unitComputer scienceNonlinear systemInvariant extended Kalman filterKalman filterInertial navigation systemControl engineeringArtificial intelligenceMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we detail a numerical optimization method for automated tuning of a nonlinear filter used in Attitude Heading Reference Systems (AHRS). First, the Levenberg Marquardt method is used for nonlinear parameter estimation of the observer model. Two approaches are described; Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) based supervised implementation and unsupervised error minimization based implementation. The quaternion formulation is used in the development in order to have a global minimum parametrization in the rotation group. These two methods are then compared using both simulated and experimental data taken from a commercial Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) used in an autopilot system of an unmanned aerial vehicle. The results reveal that the proposed EKF based supervised implementation is faster and also has a better robustness against different initial conditions.

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)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInertial Sensor and NavigationFrench-language works237,207