Radar/INS Integration and Map Matching for Land Vehicle Navigation in Urban Environments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Autonomous navigation requires multi-sensor fusion to achieve a high level of accuracy in different environments. Global navigation satellite system (GNSS) receivers are the main components in most navigation systems. However, GNSS signals are subject to blockage and multipath effects in challenging areas, e.g., tunnels, underground parking, and downtown or urban areas. Therefore, different sensors, such as inertial navigation systems (INSs) and radar, can be used to compensate for GNSS signal deterioration and to meet continuity requirements. In this paper, a novel algorithm was applied to improve land vehicle navigation in GNSS-challenging environments through radar/INS integration and map matching. Four radar units were utilized in this work. Two units were used to estimate the vehicle's forward velocity, and the four units were used together to estimate the vehicle's position. The integrated solution was estimated in two steps. First, the radar solution was fused with an INS through an extended Kalman filter (EKF). Second, map matching was used to correct the radar/INS integrated position using OpenStreetMap (OSM). The developed algorithm was evaluated using real data collected in Calgary's urban area and downtown Toronto. The results show the efficiency of the proposed method, which had a horizontal position RMS error percentage of less than 1% of the distance traveled for three minutes of a simulated GNSS outage.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".