MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4243905041 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14656725.v1

Nonlinear Estimation for Autonomous Optical Navigation

2021· preprint· en· W4243905041 on OpenAlexaff
Stefan Hallgrimson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInertial Sensor and Navigation
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtended Kalman filterOrbit determinationKalman filterControl theory (sociology)Computer scienceEstimatorGeosynchronous orbitOrbit (dynamics)Particle filterMathematicsArtificial intelligenceEngineeringAerospace engineeringSatelliteGlobal Positioning SystemStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many interplanetary mission concepts can benefit from autonomous orbit estimation, particularly during critical mission phases. Previous studies have examined the feasibility of optical navigation using nanosatellite class instruments. While promising, these techniques are not without drawbacks. Convergence of the navigation estimates are often sensitive to errors in initial state estimates. This thesis compares various methods to perform nonlinear estimation for autonomous optical navigation. These methods include an extended Kalman filter (EKF), an unscented Kalman filter (UKF), a particle filter (PF), a fixed-lag smoother (FLS), and moving horizon estimation (MHE). The EKF, UKF, and PF can be implemented in real time, while the FLS and MHE implement a delay into the estimation process. To compare the performance of each state estimator three initial reference scenarios around Mars were considered: a hyperbolic flyby, an elliptic orbit and a orbital maneuver using observations of Mars and its moons. Parameter estimation was also explored, where the mass of Mars was to be estimated as a reference parameter in both the hyperbolic and elliptical trajectories. One last reference scenario included a low Earth orbit (LEO) using observations of satellites in a geosynchronous equatorial orbit. In each case, the FLS and MHE showed similar or better performance over each state estimator but at the cost of an increased computation time with respect to the reference EKF. Similarly the UKF was able to provide improved results withe respect to the EKF. While, the PF provided poor estimates in the Mars trajectories but improvements were seen from the UKF and EKF in the LEO scenario.

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 score0.427
Threshold uncertainty score0.740

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInertial Sensor and NavigationFrench-language works237,207