Integrating an electronic compass for position tracking on a wheeled tricycle mobile robot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dead-reckoning via encoders on wheeled-mobile robots is a simple but inaccurate method to estimate position. The major drawback of encoders is wheel slippage errors that accumulate over time. This problem is often addressed by using additional sensors such as compass, gyroscope, or GPS. This paper details the integration and effectiveness of a relatively low-cost solution using an electronic compass to reduce positioning error on a wheeled tricycle mobile robot. A customised Visual Studio program has been developed to adjust the settings of the electronic compass and integrate it with the Visual Studio based robot control system. The electronic compass heading data is fused with the encoder odometry heading data in three different ways: simple fusion, linear weighted fusion, and Kalman filter fusion. Simple fusion and linear weighted fusion rely on parameters determined from angular acceleration and angular velocity, respectively. The Kalman filter uses variance data for the encoders and electronic compass to determine an optimal heading. Experiments have been conducted in an indoor corridor environment to evaluate and compare the various fusion methods. Position error is successfully reduced and is sufficient to locate the robot within the corridor.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".