MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A novel LiDAR-GNSS-INS Two-Phase Tightly Coupled integration scheme for precise navigation

2024· article· en· W4396764478 on OpenAlexaff
Mengchi Ai, Ilyar Asl Sabbaghian Hokmabad, Mohamed Elhabiby, Naser El‐Sheimy

Bibliographic record

VenueISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInertial Sensor and Navigation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGNSS applicationsScheme (mathematics)LidarComputer scienceRemote sensingPhase (matter)Global Positioning SystemPhysicsGeologyTelecommunicationsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Recent advances in precise navigation have extensively utilized the integration of Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) and Inertial Navigation System (INS), particularly in the domain of intelligent vehicles. However, the efficacy of such navigation systems is considerably compromised by the reflection and multipath disruptions of non-light-of-sight (NLOS) signals. Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR)-based odometry, an active perception-based sensor known for its precise 3D measurements, has become increasingly prevalent in augmenting navigation systems. Nonetheless, the assimilation of LiDAR odometry with GNSS/INS systems presents substantial challenges. Addressing these challenges, this study introduces a two-phase sensor fusion (TPSF) approach that synergistically combines GNSS positioning, LiDAR odometry, and IMU pre-integration through a dual-stage sensor fusion process. The initial stage employs an Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) to amalgamate the GNSS solution with IMU Mechanization, facilitating the estimation of IMU biases and system initialization. Subsequently, the second stage integrates scan-to-map LiDAR odometry with IMU mechanization to support continuous LiDAR factor estimation. Factor graph optimization (FGO) is then utilized for the comprehensive fusion of LiDAR factors, IMU pre-integration, and GNSS solutions. The efficacy of the proposed methodology is corroborated through rigorous testing on a demanding trajectory from an urbanized open-source dataset, with the system demonstrating a notable enhancement in performance compared to the state-of-the-art algorithms, achieving a translational Standard Deviation (STD) of 1.269 meters.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciencesSame topicInertial Sensor and NavigationFrench-language works237,207