MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409641820 · doi:10.1109/tim.2025.3562977

Deep-Learning-Enhanced Outlier Detection for Precise GNSS Positioning With Smartphones

2025· article· en· W4409641820 on OpenAlexafffund
Yang Jiang, Zelin Zhou, Hongzhou Yang, Gao Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGNSS positioning and interference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGNSS applicationsComputer scienceGlobal Positioning SystemArtificial intelligenceAnomaly detectionDeep learningOutlierRemote sensingComputer visionReal-time computingTelecommunicationsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A robust outlier detection method is proposed for effective detection of smartphone Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) measurement outliers frequently caused by multipath and non-line-of-sight (NLOS) effects. The new method has been developed through a novel combination of a binary-tree-based solution separation (SS) test (SS-test) and the deep-learning techniques, which leverages the statistical testing’s outlier detection efficiency and the deep-learning’s proficiency in modeling complex relationships. First, the binary-tree-based SS-test identifies specific subsets of outlier-free measurements. Second, the network predicts three-dimensional (3D) positioning errors through those subsets. Third, we obtain an accurate positioning solution from the measurement subset with the smallest predicted errors. To validate the proposed approach, a vehicle-based field test was conducted with a smartphone. The testing results indicate that the proposed method has reduced the rate of large positioning errors by 79% and improved the positioning accuracy by 41% compared to the conventional methods without robust statistical testing.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.896
Threshold uncertainty score0.542

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and MeasurementSame topicGNSS positioning and interferenceFrench-language works237,207