Simultaneous Hand–Eye/Robot–World/Camera–IMU Calibration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The problem of calibrating an extrinsic parameter between a camera and an inertial measurement unit (IMU) using an industrial robotic manipulator has been studied. This generates a result of hand–eye/robot–world/camera–IMU calibration in a simultaneous fashion. The developed method is free of inertial integration over time and, thus, is robust to uncertain IMU biases. It is derived that the problem can be solved via a simultaneous optimization of hand–eye/robot–world/camera–IMU transformations. The resulted optimization is highly nonconvex on the special Euclidean group, and we give globally optimal solutions. Experiments verify that the proposed method is capable of estimating accurate calibration parameters. Comparative studies between representatives show the global optimality of the proposed method. The new simultaneous method is capable of conducting calibration of a robot/camera/IMU combination. The designed method guarantees the global optimality; thus, the accuracy is ensured. The developed globally optimal solutions will also be computationally efficient on modern industrial computers. Finally, we show that the proposed method can give accurate calibration results for a stereo/IMU sensor combination.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".