MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098354438 · doi:10.1017/s0373463307004560

A Standard Testing and Calibration Procedure for Low Cost MEMS Inertial Sensors and Units

2008· article· en· W2098354438 on OpenAlexafffund
Priyanka Aggarwal, Zainab Syed, Xiaoji Niu, Naser El‐Sheimy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Navigation · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInertial Sensor and Navigation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGlobal Positioning SystemInertial measurement unitInertial navigation systemCalibrationAllan varianceGPS/INSComputer scienceKinematicsNoise (video)Microelectromechanical systemsScale factor (cosmology)Position (finance)OrthogonalityNavigation systemSimulationAssisted GPSReal-time computingOrientation (vector space)Artificial intelligenceStandard deviationTelecommunicationsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Navigation involves the integration of methodologies and systems for estimating the time varying position and attitude of moving objects. Inertial Navigation Systems (INS) and the Global Positioning System (GPS) are among the most widely used navigation systems. The use of cost effective MEMS based inertial sensors has made GPS/INS integrated navigation systems more affordable. However MEMS sensors suffer from various errors that have to be calibrated and compensated to get acceptable navigation results. Moreover the performance characteristics of these sensors are highly dependent on the environmental conditions such as temperature variations. Hence there is a need for the development of accurate, reliable and efficient thermal models to reduce the effect of these errors that can potentially degrade the system performance. In this paper, the Allan variance method is used to characterize the noise in the MEMS sensors. A six-position calibration method is applied to estimate the deterministic sensor errors such as bias, scale factor, and non-orthogonality. An efficient thermal variation model is proposed and the effectiveness of the proposed calibration methods is investigated through a kinematic van test using integrated GPS and MEMS-based inertial measurement unit (IMU).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations179
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NavigationSame topicInertial Sensor and NavigationFrench-language works237,207