PROBE: Predictive robust estimation for visual-inertial navigation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Navigation in unknown, chaotic environments continues to present a significant challenge for the robotics community. Lighting changes, self-similar textures, motion blur, and moving objects are all considerable stumbling blocks for state-of-the-art vision-based navigation algorithms. In this paper we present a novel technique for improving localization accuracy within a visual-inertial navigation system (VINS). We make use of training data to learn a model for the quality of visual features with respect to localization error in a given environment. This model maps each visual observation from a predefined prediction space of visual-inertial predictors onto a scalar weight, which is then used to scale the observation covariance matrix. In this way, our model can adjust the influence of each observation according to its quality. We discuss our choice of predictors and report substantial reductions in localization error on 4 km of data from the KITTI dataset, as well as on experimental datasets consisting of 700 m of indoor and outdoor driving on a small ground rover equipped with a Skybotix VI-Sensor.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it