MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114533122 · doi:10.1109/plans.2006.1650612

Architecture and System Performance of SPAN -NovAtel's GPS/INS Solution

2006· article· en· W2114533122 on OpenAlexaff
Sandy Kennedy, Jason Hamilton, H. Martell

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInertial Sensor and Navigation
Canadian institutionsNovAtel (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobal Positioning SystemWaypointInertial measurement unitTime to first fixPrecision Lightweight GPS ReceiverReal-time computingGPS/INSInertial navigation systemComputer scienceAssisted GPSGPS signalsGPS disciplined oscillatorSimulationInertial frame of referenceGps receiverTelecommunicationsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a GPS receiver manufacturer, NovAtel is in a unique position to build a GPS/INS navigation system. The Synchronized Position Attitude Navigation (SPAN) system is based on OEM4 receiver technology combined with an Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU). The IMU integration is tightly coupled with access to the GPS receiver core. The integrated system provides real time position, velocity and attitude. GPS outages can be seamlessly bridged, enabling more reliable navigation through challenging environments like urban canyons. Additionally, GPS performance is improved with the integration of inertial measurements, allowing for faster signal reacquisition and faster return to a fixed integer carrier phase solution after signal outage. The real time solution is computed on board the receiver and raw data can be simultaneously logged for post-processing. Post processing is performed by NovAtel’s Waypoint Inertial Explorer package. This paper discusses NovAtel's approach to INS/GPS system architecture. To demonstrate the performance of the SPAN system, data will be collected under real world conditions in a land vehicle. Test results will show system performance with various levels of GPS aiding and with wheel sensor aiding. The real time solution will be compared to the post-processed solution. Methods to deal with the constraints of real time will be discussed. The accuracy benefits of a post-processed solution will be demonstrated as well.

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)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.153
Teacher spread0.150 · 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

Citations57
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInertial Sensor and NavigationFrench-language works237,207