MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3161552732

Towards End-to-end Learning of Monocular Visual-inertial Odometry with an Extended Kalman Filter

2020· dissertation· W3161552732 on OpenAlexaff
Chunshang Li

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2020
Typedissertation
Language
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHermeneutics and Narrative Identity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOdometryKalman filterMonocularComputer visionArtificial intelligenceEnd-to-end principleVisual odometryInertial frame of referenceComputer scienceRobotPhysicsMobile robot
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classical visual-inertial fusion relies heavily on manually crafted image processing pipelines, which are prone to failure in situations with rapid motion and texture-less scenes. While end-to-end learning methods show promising results in addressing these limitations, embedding domain knowledge in the form of classical estimation processes within the end-to-end learning architecture has the potential of combining the best of both worlds. In this thesis, we propose the first end-to-end trainable visual-inertial odometry (VIO) algorithm that leverages a robo-centric Extended Kalman Filter (EKF). The EKF propagates states through a known inertial measurement unit (IMU) kinematics model and accepts relative pose measurements and uncertainties from a deep network as updates. The system is fully differentiable and can be trained end-to-end through backpropagation. Our method achieves competitive results among state of the art classical and learning based VIO methods on the KITTI dataset.

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)0.003
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 venueTSpace→Same topicHermeneutics and Narrative Identity→French-language works237,207→