Observability-Constrained VINS for MAVs Using Interacting Multiple Model Algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents the design of an interacting multiple model (IMM) filter for visual-inertial navigation (VIN) of MAVs. VIN of MAVs in practice typically uses a single system model for its state estimator design. However, microaerial vehicles (MAVs) can operate in different scenarios such as aggressive flights, hovering flights, and under high external disturbance requiring changing constraints imposed on the estimator model. This article proposes the use of a conventional VIN and a drag force VIN in an error-state IMM filtering framework to address the need for multiple models in the estimator. The work uses an epipolar geometry constraint for the design of the measurement model for both filters to realize computationally efficient state updates. Observability of the proposed modifications to VIN filters (drag force model and epipolar measurement model) are analyzed, and observability-based consistency rules are derived for the two filters of the IMM. Monte Carlo numerical simulations validate the performance of the observability constrained IMM, which improved the accuracy and consistency of the visual-inertial navigation system (VINS) for changing flight conditions and external wind disturbance scenarios. Experimental validation is performed using the EuRoC dataset to evaluate the performance of the proposed IMM filter design. The results show that the IMM outperforms stand-alone filters used in the IMM filtering bank by switching between the filters based on the residual likelihood of the models.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".