MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2891275937 · doi:10.1109/lra.2019.2891492

A White-Noise-on-Jerk Motion Prior for Continuous-Time Trajectory Estimation on <italic>SE(3)</italic>

2019· article· en· W2891275937 on OpenAlexafffund
Tim Y. Tang, David J. Yoon, Timothy D. Barfoot

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Robotics and Automation Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHuman Pose and Action Recognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsJerkAccelerationWhite noiseTrajectoryNoise (video)Constant (computer programming)Additive white Gaussian noiseComputer scienceMotion (physics)MathematicsControl theory (sociology)Artificial intelligenceStatisticsPhysicsClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Simultaneous trajectory estimation and mapping (STEAM) offers an efficient approach to continuous-time trajectory estimation, by representing the trajectory as a Gaussian process (GP). Previous formulations of the STEAM framework use a GP prior that assumes white-noise-on-acceleration, with the prior mean encouraging constant body-centric velocity. We show that such a prior cannot sufficiently represent trajectory sections with nonzero acceleration, resulting in a bias to the posterior estimates. This letter derives a novel motion prior that assumes white-noise-on-jerk, where the prior mean encourages constant body-centric acceleration. With the new prior, we formulate a variation of STEAM that estimates the pose, body-centric velocity, and body-centric acceleration. By evaluating across several datasets, we show that the new prior greatly outperforms the white-noise-on-acceleration prior in terms of the solution accuracy.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.006

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations41
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Robotics and Automation LettersSame topicHuman Pose and Action RecognitionFrench-language works237,207