INS/GPS/LiDAR Integrated Navigation System for Urban and Indoor Environments Using Hybrid Scan Matching Algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper takes advantage of the complementary characteristics of Global Positioning System (GPS) and Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) to provide periodic corrections to Inertial Navigation System (INS) alternatively in different environmental conditions. In open sky, where GPS signals are available and LiDAR measurements are sparse, GPS is integrated with INS. Meanwhile, in confined outdoor environments and indoors, where GPS is unreliable or unavailable and LiDAR measurements are rich, LiDAR replaces GPS to integrate with INS. This paper also proposes an innovative hybrid scan matching algorithm that combines the feature-based scan matching method and Iterative Closest Point (ICP) based scan matching method. The algorithm can work and transit between two modes depending on the number of matched line features over two scans, thus achieving efficiency and robustness concurrently. Two integration schemes of INS and LiDAR with hybrid scan matching algorithm are implemented and compared. Real experiments are performed on an Unmanned Ground Vehicle (UGV) for both outdoor and indoor environments. Experimental results show that the multi-sensor integrated system can remain sub-meter navigation accuracy during the whole trajectory.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".