Cited by 69Robotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationGaussian Processes and Bayesian InferenceTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks

Gaussian Process Gauss–Newton for non-parametric simultaneous localization and mapping

Tong, Chi Hay, Furgale, Paul, Barfoot, Timothy D.·2013·The International Journal of Robotics Research

Abstract

In this paper, we present Gaussian Process Gauss–Newton (GPGN), an algorithm for non-parametric, continuous-time, nonlinear, batch state estimation. This work adapts the methods of Gaussian process (GP) regression to address the problem of batch simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM) by using the Gauss–Newton optimization method. In particular, we formulate the estimation problem with a continuous-time state model, along with the more conventional discrete-time measurements. Two derivations are presented in this paper, reflecting both the weight-space and function-space approaches from the GP regression literature. Validation is conducted through simulations and a hardware experiment, which utilizes the well-understood problem of two-dimensional SLAM as an illustrative example. The performance is compared with the traditional discrete-time batch Gauss–Newton approach, and we also show that GPGN can be employed to estimate motion with only range/bearing measurements of landmarks (i.e. no odometry), even when there are not enough measurements to constrain the pose at a given timestep.

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 · 10.1177/0278364913478672

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Tong et al. changed the parametrization of the trajectory from basis curves to a Gaussian process representation, where nodes in the factor graph are actual robot poses and any other pose can be interpolated by computing the posterior mean at the given time.

    “Tong et al. [243] changed the parametrization of the trajectory from basis curves to a Gaussian process representation, where nodes in the factor graph are actual robot poses and any other pose can be interpolated by computing the posterior mean at the given time.”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tong, C. H., Furgale, P., & Barfoot, T. D.
Affiliations
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • ETH Zurich (CH)
Venue
The International Journal of Robotics Research
Published
2013-04
Volume
32
Issue
5
Pages
507-525
ISSN
  • 0278-3649 (ISSN-L)
  • 1741-3176
OpenAlex
W2001496915
Cited by
68
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
12.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
The International Journal of Robotics Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Robotics and Sensor-Based Localization
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Gaussian Processes and Bayesian Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Target Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks
Keywords
Gaussian process regression, Gauss-Newton optimization, SLAM, nonparametric estimation

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