Is an INS/GNSS Kalman filter honest about its drift when accelerometer bias is flicker noise?
research/sensing-nees
With a 1/f accelerometer bias, a filter with no bias state claims 2.9 m after a 300 s GNSS outage when the RMS is 151 m (NEES/dof 514 to 2,000 at 100 ug); a random walk read off the Allan curve at 1 s or 10 s claims 2.4 to 3.7 times the true error, and at 100 s close to honest (0.9 to 1.6). Synthetic bias, swept instability
What it found
Tests whether a 1-D INS/GNSS Kalman filter reports its own error correctly when the accelerometer bias is 1/f noise (five Gauss-Markov processes, 1 to 10,000 s) on top of white noise of 70 µg/√Hz (ICM-42688-P product page). Bias instability is swept from 10 to 300 µg and GNSS drops out for 300 s. NEES per degree of freedom (1 is honest): a filter with no bias state scores 21 to 21,700; a random walk read off the Allan curve at 1 s or 10 s scores 0.06 to 0.16 at 300 s (too pessimistic) and at 100 s 0.9 to 2.3; the matched model scores 0.88 to 1.05. At 100 µg the 300 s position RMS is 66 m matched, 81 m tuned at 100 s and 103 m tuned at 10 s. The bias is synthetic with a swept (not sourced) instability, one axis, no attitude coupling, 400 Monte Carlo paths.
A figure from its own output
Paper, code and results
More in Sensing, imaging and 3D
- Does marginalising old keyframes instead of pinning them fix long-path drift in a visual-inertial smoother, and does IMU grade then matter?A Schur-complement prior in the sensing-vio planar smoother cuts rms drift on 30 s paths from 12.3 % to 2.5 % of path (8 seeds, baseline IMU), and IMU grade then orders the results (0.25x noise 2.1 %, 1x 2.5 %, 4x 6.5 %), unlike with the pinned prior; planar and synthetic, not EuRoC
- How many cheap gyros, fused, match one better gyro at the same cost?How many cheap gyros, fused, match one better gyro at equal cost? With independent errors the price ratio must beat
k²(100 for a 10× quieter unit); shared error above1/k²means no array size ties; unequal white/bias improvement makes the answer depend on integration time. Stylised. - Does a shared temperature coefficient put a floor under an array of cheap gyros?Does a shared temperature coefficient put a floor under an array of cheap gyros? The shared part of the tempco does not average out: in the illustrative case a 3× better gyro can no longer be matched at any array size above a 0.2 °C/min ramp over 100 s; compensation quality, not array size, decides.
- How many frames from a small sensor, merged, match one frame from a bigger one?How many frames from a small sensor, merged, match one frame from a sensor with A× the pixel area? A shot-noise-limited burst needs A frames, a read-noise-limited one up to A² (formula and simulation agree); splitting the same total exposure never ties; registration blur and bracketed HDR are measured. Synthetic scenes only.
- What does a moving subject do to a burst merge, and what does robust merging cost?What does a moving subject do to a burst merge? A plain mean ghosts at every speed and gets worse as frames are added (30.5 dB at 8 frames, 25.0 at 48), median and sigma-clip do no better for a slow subject, and a reference-guided merge keeps improving and ties a 4×-area frame at about 6 frames at 0.1 dB cost when nothing moves. Synthetic scenes only.
- Can aligning a moving subject, instead of rejecting it, rescue a burst merge?Can aligning a moving subject rescue a burst merge instead of rejecting it? Inside the subject, yes (37.0 dB against 31.5 for reject-only and 32.8 for a 4×-area frame at 8 frames), but over the whole image rejecting is as good or better (31.7 against 31.8 dB), the aligner moves 10–31% of static pixels on noise, and the revealed-background ring stays 4 dB short of the large frame. Synthetic scenes only.
All 31 Sensing, imaging and 3D projects →
Other research topics
Proper scoring & elicitation28Effort & peer prediction9Verification games & slashing19Detection & tolerances14Markets as routers13Prediction-market design9Paying contributors8Decentralised training systems23Digital twins & sim-to-real164LLM chip design loops40Robot manufacturing loops53Ambient AI assistant46Self-replicating manufacturing34Simulation-first design64Engineered clothing45Task-specific AI accelerators40Algorithmic chip-design loops42Open-source purpose-built robots44The software-engineering loop43Adversarial human imitation41Open-source residential construction41Autonomous multi-angle capture34Sensing, imaging and 3D31Energy supply and dense energy storage39Robot societies among people31Agentic co-design of low-cost robots27Laundry-hanging robots25Machine learning on qualitative data23Robots on the building site27Civilizations & group psychology1History & human sciences1
Produced with AI assistance (Claude). Results are from the code in this repository and are simulated or stylised unless the abstract says otherwise; nothing here implies affiliation with or endorsement by any lab, researcher or company cited. MIT licensed.