MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414659083 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-03140-2

Batch Bayesian auto-tuning for nonlinear Kalman estimators

2025· article· en· W4414659083 on OpenAlexafffund
Cristovão Freitas Iglesias, Miodrag Bolić

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Research Council Canada
KeywordsEstimatorConsistency (knowledge bases)Kalman filterBayesian probabilityNonlinear systemReliability (semiconductor)Process (computing)Noise (video)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The optimal performance of nonlinear Kalman estimators (NKEs) depends on properly tuning five key components: process noise covariance, measurement noise covariance, initial state noise covariance, initial state conditions, and dynamic model parameters. However, the traditional auto-tuning approaches based on normalized estimation error squared or normalized innovation squared cannot efficiently estimate all NKE components because they rely on ground truth state models (usually unavailable) or on a subset of measured data used to compute the innovation errors. Furthermore, manual tuning is labor-intensive and prone to errors. In this work, we introduce an approach called batch Bayesian auto-tuning (BAT) for NKEs. This novel approach enables using all available measured data (not just those selected for generating innovation errors) during the tuning process of all NKE components. This is done by defining a comprehensive posterior distribution of all NKE components given all available measured data outside of the NKE recursive process based on the equivalence between the posterior distributions used in batch and recursive Bayesian inference. Our empirical validation on a synthetic bioprocess dataset demonstrates that BAT significantly improves the consistency and accuracy of NKE estimations compared to baseline methods. These findings indicate that BAT can effectively optimize NKE tuning, improving performance and reliability in practical applications.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicFault Detection and Control Systems→French-language works237,207→