Stochastic Modeling of Smartphones GNSS Observations Using LS-VCE and Application to Samsung S20
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, numerous smartphones have been equipped with global navigation satellite system (GNSS) technology, enabling individuals to utilize their own devices for positioning and navigation purposes. In 2016, with the launch of a mobile app by Google, namely GnssLogger, smartphone users with Android version 7 or higher were able to record raw GNSS measurements (i.e., pseudorange, carrier phase, Doppler, and carrier-to-noise density ratio (C/N0)). Since then, enhancing the accuracy and efficiency of smartphone positioning has become an interesting area of research. Precise point positioning (PPP) is a powerful method providing precise real-time positioning of a single receiver, and it can be applied to smartphone observations as well. Achieving high-precision PPP requires selecting appropriate functional and stochastic models. In this study, we investigate the development of more reliable stochastic models for smartphone GNSS observations. The least-square variance component estimation (LS-VCE) method is applied to double-difference (DD) pseudorange and carrier phase observations from two Samsung S20s to obtain appropriate variances for GPS and GLONASS. According to the results, there is no significant correlation between the pseudorange and carrier phase observations of GPS and GLONASS on the L1 frequency. Furthermore, the quality of GLONASS carrier phase observations is comparable to that of GPS. The model's performance is then assessed with respect to single-frequency precise point positioning (SF-PPP) using a dataset collected in kinematic mode from a Samsung S20 smartphone. A significant improvement of 25.1% and 32.7% on the root-mean-square (RMS) of horizontal positioning and the 50th percentile error, respectively, was achieved when employing the obtained stochastic model.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".