New Multi-Step Iterative Methods for Solving Systems of Nonlinear Equations and Their Application on GNSS Pseudorange Equations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A two-step fifth and a multi-step 5+3r order iterative method are derived, r≥1 for finding the solution of system of nonlinear equations. The new two-step fifth order method requires two functions, two first order derivatives, and the multi-step methods needs a additional function per step. The performance of this method has been tested with finding solutions to several test problems then applied to solving pseudorange nonlinear equations on Global Navigation Satellite Signal (GNSS). To solve the problem, at least four satellite's measurements are needed to locate the user position and receiver time offset. In this work, a number of satellites from 4 to 8 are considered such that the number of equations is more than the number of unknown variables to calculate the user position. Moreover, the Geometrical Dilution of Precision (GDOP) values are computed based on the satellite selection algorithm (fuzzy logic method) which could be able to bring the best suitable combination of satellites. We have restricted the number of satellites to 4 to 6 for solving the pseudorange equations to get better GDOP value even after increasing the number of satellites beyond six also yields a 0.4075 GDOP value. Actually, the conventional methods utilized in the position calculation module of the GNSS receiver typically converge with six iterations for finding the user position whereas the proposed method takes only three iterations which really decreases the computation time which provide quicker position calculation. A practical study was done to evaluate the computation efficiency index (CE) and efficiency index (IE) of the new model. From the simulation outcomes, it has been noted that the new method is more efficient and converges 33% faster than the conventional iterative methods with good accuracy of 92%.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".