MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3105038554 · doi:10.22215/etd/2020-14174

Sensor Fusion in Autonomous Navigation Using Fast SLAM 3.0 – An Improved SLAM Method

2020· dissertation· en· W3105038554 on OpenAlexaff
Zheng Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSimultaneous localization and mappingExtended Kalman filterComputer visionArtificial intelligenceOdometryRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceKalman filterRobotSensor fusionCovarianceCovariance matrixMobile robotMathematicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis introduces three important components of autonomous navigation: visual odometry and image fusion; Kalman filtering and its application; simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM), and presents Fast -SLAM 3.0: an approach to SLAM that combines the advantages and eliminates the disadvantages of Fast SLAM 2.0 and Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) SLAM.The Fast SLAM 3.0 models the particles as the robot pose mean of a Gaussian distribution, which keeps the error covariance matrix (P) of pose estimation propagating as normal EKF SLAM.The usage of those fully functional Extended Kalman Filters in each particle allows uncertainty to be remembered over the whole trajectories, avoiding Fast SLAM 2.0's tendency to become over-confident and keeping the best feature of Fast SLAM that locally avoids linearization of the robot model and provides a high level of robustness to the clutter and ambiguous data association.Extensive simulations show that the Fast SLAM 3.0 significantly outperforms both Fast SLAM 2.0 and EKF SLAM.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationFrench-language works237,207