MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166429996 · doi:10.1109/tro.2010.2061290

A Kalman-Filter-Based Method for Pose Estimation in Visual Servoing

2010· article· en· W2166429996 on OpenAlexaff
Farrokh Janabi‐Sharifi, Mohammed Marey

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Robotics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersInstitut national de recherche en informatique et en automatique (INRIA)
KeywordsVisual servoingExtended Kalman filterComputer visionArtificial intelligenceKalman filterPoseInitializationInvariant extended Kalman filterComputer scienceRobotLinearizationControl theory (sociology)Noise (video)Image (mathematics)Nonlinear system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The problem of estimating position and orientation (pose) of an object in real time constitutes an important issue for vision-based control of robots. Many vision-based pose-estimation schemes in robot control rely on an extended Kalman filter (EKF) that requires tuning of filter parameters. To obtain satisfactory results, EKF-based techniques rely on “known” noise statistics, initial object pose, and sufficiently high sampling rates for good approximation of measurement-function linearization. Deviations from such assumptions usually lead to degraded pose estimation during visual servoing. In this paper, a new algorithm, namely iterative adaptive EKF (IAEKF), is proposed by integrating mechanisms for noise adaptation and iterative-measurement linearization. The experimental results are provided to demonstrate the superiority of IAEKF in dealing with erroneous a priori statistics, poor pose initialization, variations in the sampling rate, and trajectory dynamics.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations184
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on RoboticsSame topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207