MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W790429187 · doi:10.1177/0278364915583680

Relaxing the planar assumption: 3D state estimation for an autonomous surface vessel

2015· article· en· W790429187 on OpenAlexaff
Gregory Hitz, François Pomerleau, Francis Colas, Roland Siegwart

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Robotics Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUnderwater Vehicles and Communication Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBathymetryComputer scienceKalman filterExtended Kalman filterComputer visionFilter (signal processing)Unmanned surface vehicleArtificial intelligencePlanarShoreGround truthPoint (geometry)Iterative closest pointField (mathematics)Surface (topology)AlgorithmMarine engineeringGeologyEngineeringPoint cloudGeographyMathematicsComputer graphics (images)Cartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autonomous Surface Vessels (ASVs) are increasingly being proposed as tools to automate environmental data collection, bathymetric mapping and shoreline monitoring. For many applications it can be assumed that the boat operates on a 2D plane. However, with the involvement of exteroceptive sensors like cameras or laser rangefinders, knowing the 3D pose of the boat becomes critical. In this paper, we formulate three different algorithms based on 3D extended Kalman filter state estimation for ASV localization. We compare them using field testing results with ground truth measurements, and demonstrate that the best performance is achieved with a model-based solution in combination with a complementary filter for attitude estimation. Furthermore, we present a parameter identification methodology and show that it also yields accurate results when used with inexpensive sensors. Finally, we present a long-term series (i.e. over a full year) of shoreline monitoring data sets and discuss the need for map maintenance routines based on a variant of the Iterative Closest Point algorithm.

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)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.811
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.194
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of Robotics ResearchSame topicUnderwater Vehicles and Communication SystemsFrench-language works237,207