MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Testing Vehicle-to-Vehicle Relative Position and Attitude Estimation using Multiple UWB Ranging

2020· article· en· W3129987514 on OpenAlexaff
Ehab Ghanem, Kyle O’Keefe, Richard Klukas

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndoor and Outdoor Localization Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRangingUltra-widebandChipsetGlobal Positioning SystemComputer scienceReal-time computingPosition (finance)Heading (navigation)Hybrid positioning systemKalman filterWirelessFrame (networking)Positioning systemEngineeringTelecommunicationsArtificial intelligenceAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ultra-wideband (UWB) is an emerging technology that has the ability to accurately measure ranges over short to medium distances (10 cm to 300 meters) in outdoor and indoor situations[1]. The technology has been investigated for many applications that require both positioning and communication. Among these applications are robot automation and vehicle positioning. Many companies are trying to benefit from UWB signals and many IC manufacturers are already offering chipsets that can calculate the Time of Flight (TOF) for Two-Way-Ranging (TWR) with UWB signals. Range measurements acquired through UWB have an accuracy on the order of 10 cm, which is more accurate than conventional GPS for estimating a vehicle position in outdoor environments. This paper proposes and tests a method of using UWB ranges from two radios on one vehicle to two radios on another vehicle to estimate the 2-D relative position and heading of the second vehicle in the body frame of the first. The method is described, a positioning algorithm based on an extended Kalman filter is presented and an initial fields test using two moving vehicles on a suburban street is presented.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.491
Threshold uncertainty score0.464

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIndoor and Outdoor Localization TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207