MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146770281

In-Receiver Multiple Reference Station RTK Solution

2004· article· en· W2146770281 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
P. Alves, G. Lachapelle, Mark Cannon

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the 17th International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of The Institute of Navigation (ION GNSS 2004) · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGNSS positioning and interference
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReal Time KinematicComputer scienceDifferential GPSGlobal Positioning SystemReal-time computingBase stationDifferential (mechanical device)Position (finance)GNSS applicationsKinematicsPrecise Point PositioningRemote sensingTelecommunicationsGeographyEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several methods based on the use of GPS reference networks for real-time kinematic (RTK) positioning have been proposed and tested in recent years. The use of such methods is advantageous to overcome some of the limitations of the standard single reference station differential carrier phase positioning method. Accuracies at the sub-decimeter level are possible under ideal conditions. These methods are typically discussed and implemented as regional services, whereby the network corrected data is sent to the roving receiver from a network control center. This paper discusses an alternative to this design. The in-receiver approach integrates single baseline RTK positioning and network processing into a tightly coupled filtering algorithm that can be implemented at the rover. The effectiveness of this approach is shown using a medium scale network in Southern Alberta, Canada. The 3D position RMS is reduced by 30 and 42 percent relative to the single reference station approach and 16 and 13 percent relative to the correction-based multiple reference station approach.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the 17th International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of The Institute of Navigation (ION GNSS 2004)Same topicGNSS positioning and interferenceFrench-language works237,207