Tightly-Coupled GNSS/Vision Using a Sky-Pointing Camera for Vehicle Navigation in Urban Areas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a method of fusing the ego-motion of a robot or a land vehicle estimated from an upward-facing camera with Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) signals for navigation purposes in urban environments. A sky-pointing camera is mounted on the top of a car and synchronized with a GNSS receiver. The advantages of this configuration are two-fold: firstly, for the GNSS signals, the upward-facing camera will be used to classify the acquired images into sky and non-sky (also known as segmentation). A satellite falling into the non-sky areas (e.g., buildings, trees) will be rejected and not considered for the final position solution computation. Secondly, the sky-pointing camera (with a field of view of about 90 degrees) is helpful for urban area ego-motion estimation in the sense that it does not see most of the moving objects (e.g., pedestrians, cars) and thus is able to estimate the ego-motion with fewer outliers than is typical with a forward-facing camera. The GNSS and visual information systems are tightly-coupled in a Kalman filter for the final position solution. Experimental results demonstrate the ability of the system to provide satisfactory navigation solutions and better accuracy than the GNSS-only and the loosely-coupled GNSS/vision, 20 percent and 82 percent (in the worst case) respectively, in a deep urban canyon, even in conditions with fewer than four GNSS satellites.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".