Cited by 63Robotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor NetworksReinforcement Learning in Robotics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Nonlinear factor recovery for long-term SLAM

Mazuran, Mladen, Burgard, Wolfram, Tipaldi, Gian Diego·2016·The International Journal of Robotics Research

Abstract

For long-term operations, graph-based simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM) approaches require nodes to be marginalized in order to control the computational cost. In this paper, we present a method to recover a set of nonlinear factors that best represents the marginal distribution in terms of Kullback–Leibler divergence. The proposed method, which we call nonlinear factor recovery (NFR), estimates both the mean and the information matrix of the set of nonlinear factors, where the recovery of the latter is equivalent to solving a convex optimization problem. NFR is able to provide either the dense distribution or a sparse approximation of it. In contrast to previous algorithms, our method does not necessarily require a global linearization point and can be used with any nonlinear measurement function. Moreover, we are not restricted to only using tree-based sparse approximations and binary factors, but we can include any topology and correlations between measurements. Experiments performed on several publicly available datasets demonstrate that our method outperforms the state of the art with respect to the Kullback–Leibler divergence and the sparsity of the solution.

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 · 10.1177/0278364915581629

Cites

1 of 1 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

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?

  • Carlevaris-Bianco and Eustice, and Mazuran et al. introduce the Generic Linear Constraint (GLC) factors and the Nonlinear Graph Sparsification (NGS) method, respectively.

    “Carlevaris-Bianco and Eustice [28], and Mazuran et al. [170] introduce the Generic Linear Constraint (GLC) factors and the Nonlinear Graph Sparsification (NGS) method, respectively.”

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 36

  1. 10.1145/1143844.1143856 · DOI
  2. 10.1561/2200000016 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Boyd S, 2009, Convex optimization
  4. 10.1109/IROS.2013.6696478 · DOI
  5. 10.1109/ICRA.2013.6631403 · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1109/ICRA.2014.6906954 · DOI
  7. 10.1109/TRO.2014.2347571 · DOI
  8. 10.1109/TIT.1968.1054142 · DOI
  9. 10.1177/0278364906072768 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Duchi JC, 2008, Proceedings of the conference in uncertainty in artificial intelligence
  11. 10.1109/IROS.2010.5649205 · DOI
  12. 10.1109/IROS.2005.1545053 · DOI
  13. 10.1109/ROBOT.2004.1307180 · DOI
  14. 10.1007/s10514-006-9043-2 · DOI
  15. 10.1109/ROBOT.2007.364221 · DOI
  16. 10.1093/biostatistics/kxm045 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Golub GH, 1996, Matrix Computations
  18. 10.1109/MITS.2010.939925 · DOI · Paper page
  19. 10.15607/RSS.2007.III.009 · DOI
  20. 10.1016/0024-3795(88)90223-6 · DOI
  21. 10.1109/ECMR.2013.6698835 · DOI · Paper page
  22. 10.1007/s10514-009-9153-8 · DOI
  23. 10.1109/TRO.2009.2034435 · DOI · Paper page
  24. 10.1109/ICRA.2013.6630556 · DOI · Paper page
  25. 10.1109/ROBOT.2007.363563 · DOI
  26. 10.1109/IROS.2009.5354121 · DOI
  27. 10.1177/0278364912455072 · DOI
  28. 10.1109/IROS.2011.6094414 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Kümmerle R, 2011, Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation
  30. 10.15607/RSS.2014.X.040 · DOI
  31. 10.1090/S0025-5718-1980-0572855-7 · DOI
  32. Paskin MA, 2003, Proceedings of the international joint conference on artificial intelligence
  33. Schmidt M, 2009, Proceedings of the international conference on artificial intelligence and statistics
  34. 10.1177/0278364904045479 · DOI
  35. 10.1137/S0895479896303430 · DOI
  36. 10.1109/IROS.2011.6095128 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Mazuran, M., Burgard, W., & Tipaldi, G. D.
Affiliations
University of Freiburg (DE)
Corresponding author
Mazuran, Mladen
Venue
The International Journal of Robotics Research
Published
2015-06-29
Volume
35
Issue
1-3
Pages
50-72
ISSN
  • 0278-3649 (ISSN-L)
  • 1741-3176
OpenAlex
W900890939
Cited by
63
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 1
FWCI
8.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
The International Journal of Robotics Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Robotics and Sensor-Based Localization
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Target Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
Keywords
graph-based SLAM, marginal distribution estimation, Kullback-Leibler divergence, sparse approximation, convex optimization

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