Cited by 813Robotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationInertial Sensor and NavigationTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks

High-precision, consistent EKF-based visual-inertial odometry

Li, Mingyang, Mourikis, Anastasios I.·2013·The International Journal of Robotics Research

Abstract

In this paper, we focus on the problem of motion tracking in unknown environments using visual and inertial sensors. We term this estimation task visual–inertial odometry (VIO), in analogy to the well-known visual-odometry problem. We present a detailed study of extended Kalman filter (EKF)-based VIO algorithms, by comparing both their theoretical properties and empirical performance. We show that an EKF formulation where the state vector comprises a sliding window of poses (the multi-state-constraint Kalman filter (MSCKF)) attains better accuracy, consistency, and computational efficiency than the simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM) formulation of the EKF, in which the state vector contains the current pose and the features seen by the camera. Moreover, we prove that both types of EKF approaches are inconsistent, due to the way in which Jacobians are computed. Specifically, we show that the observability properties of the EKF’s linearized system models do not match those of the underlying system, which causes the filters to underestimate the uncertainty in the state estimates. Based on our analysis, we propose a novel, real-time EKF-based VIO algorithm, which achieves consistent estimation by (i) ensuring the correct observability properties of its linearized system model, and (ii) performing online estimation of the camera-to-inertial measurement unit (IMU) calibration parameters. This algorithm, which we term MSCKF 2.0, is shown to achieve accuracy and consistency higher than even an iterative, sliding-window fixed-lag smoother, in both Monte Carlo simulations and real-world testing.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0278364913481251

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Li, M., & Mourikis, A. I.
Affiliations
University of California, Riverside (US)
Venue
The International Journal of Robotics Research
Published
2013-05
Volume
32
Issue
6
Pages
690-711
ISSN
  • 0278-3649 (ISSN-L)
  • 1741-3176
OpenAlex
W2056358962
Cited by
813
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 45 · 2025: 64 · 2024: 65 · 2023: 72 · 2022: 64 · 2021: 76 · 2020: 72 · 2019: 99 · 2018: 81 · 2017: 71 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 45 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 6
FWCI
55.76
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 › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Inertial Sensor and Navigation
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Target Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks
Keywords
visual-inertial odometry, extended Kalman filter, multi-state constraint Kalman filter, estimator consistency, observability analysis, Jacobian computation, real-time visual tracking, uncertainty 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