Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 259

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Factor graph optimization for GNSS/INS integration: A comparison with the extended Kalman filter

Open access
Wen, Weisong, Pfeifer, Tim, Bai, Xiwei, Hsu, Li‐Ta·2021·NAVIGATION

Abstract

Abstract Factor graph optimization (FGO) recently has attracted attention as an alternative to the extended Kalman filter (EKF) for GNSS-INS integration. This study evaluates both loosely and tightly coupled integrations of GNSS code pseudorange and INS measurements for real-time positioning, using both conventional EKF and FGO with a dataset collected in an urban canyon in Hong Kong. The FGO strength is analyzed by degenerating the FGO-based estimator into an “EKF-like estimator.” In addition, the effects of window size on FGO performance are evaluated by considering both the GNSS pseudorange error models and environmental conditions. We conclude that the conventional FGO outperforms the EKF because of the following two factors: (1) FGO uses multiple iterations during the estimation to achieve a robust estimation; and (2) FGO better explores the time correlation between the measurements and states, based on a batch of historical data, when the measurements do not follow the Gaussian noise assumption.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/navi.421

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Metadata

Authors
Wen, W., Pfeifer, T., Bai, X., & Hsu, L.
Venue
NAVIGATION
Published
2021-05-22
Volume
68
Issue
2
Pages
315-331
ISSN
  • 0028-1522 (ISSN-L)
  • 2161-4296
OpenAlex
W3164521861
Cited by
259
References
36
FWCI
19.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.