4.8 Article

An Adaptive Weighting Strategy for Multisensor Integrated Navigation in Urban Areas

期刊

IEEE INTERNET OF THINGS JOURNAL
卷 10, 期 14, 页码 12777-12786

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/JIOT.2023.3256008

关键词

Adaptive Kalman filter; integrated navigation; vision

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In order to address the vulnerability issues of the traditional EKF-based GNSS/IMU/Vision fusion scheme to NLOS and multipath contaminated GNSS, as well as low-quality vision measurement, we propose an adaptive weighting strategy. By adjusting the weights of vision and GNSS measurements adaptively based on the chi-square test statistic, the proposed algorithm achieves improved accuracy compared to traditional EKF-based GNSS/IMU fusion and compared EKF-based GNSS/IMU/Vision fusion.
Integration of global navigation satellite systems (GNSS) with other sensors, such as inertial measurement units (IMU) and visual sensors, has been widely used to improve the positioning accuracy and availability of the vehicles for the Internet of Things (IoT) applications in smart cities. The traditional extended Kalman filter (EKF)-based fusion scheme, with the assumption of fixed measurements of different sensors and inaccurate GNSS quality assessment, is vulnerable to non-line-of-sight (NLOS) and multipath contaminated GNSS, as well as low-quality vision measurement. In order to tackle this issue, we have proposed an adaptive weighting strategy for GNSS/IMU/Vision integration. On the basis of dual-check GNSS assessment, we adjust the weights of the vision and GNSS measurements adaptively based on the chi-square test statistic. The field tests have demonstrated that the proposed algorithm achieves horizontal positioning root mean-square errors (RMSEs) of 11.92 and 3.61 m in deep and mild urban environments. The accuracy has improvements of 78.57% and 43.9% over traditional EKF-based GNSS/IMU fusion, and 21.53% and 23.49% over compared EKF-based GNSS/IMU/Vision fusion, respectively.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据