Abstract

It is well known that in a Kalman filtering framework, all sensor observations or measurements contribute toward improving the accuracy of state estimation, but, as observations become older, their impact toward improving estimations becomes smaller to the point that they offer no practical benefit. In this paper, we provide an practical technique for determining the merit of an old observation using system parameters. We demonstrate that the benefit provided by an old observation decreases exponentially with the number of observations captured and processed after it. To quantify the merit of an old observation, we use the filter gain for the delayed observation, found by re-processing all past measurements between the delayed observation and the current time estimate, a high cost task. We demonstrate the value of the proposed technique to system designers using both nearly-constant position (random walk) and nearly-constant velocity (discrete white-noise acceleration, DWNA) cases. In these cases, the merit (that is, gain) of an old observation can be computed in closed-form without iteration. The analysis technique incorporates the state transition function, the observation function, the state transition noise, and the observation noise to quantify the merit of an old observation. Numerical simulations demonstrate the accuracy of these predictions even when measurements arrive randomly according to a Poisson distribution. Simulations confirm that our approach correctly predicts which observations increase estimation accuracy based on their delay by comparing a single-step out-of-sequence Kalman filter with a selective version that drops out-of-sequence observations. This approach may be used in system design to evaluate feasibility of a multi-agent target tracking system, and when selecting system parameters including sensor rates and network latencies.

Highlights

  • In many estimation applications, sensor observations or measurements are received out-ofsequence (OOS); that is, the observations arrive at the filter in a different order than they were measured

  • Based on the decaying exponential bound for the function(s) making up the closed-form solution for Kn ( the maximum delay (Td) ) in these cases, we suggest how to select a time-delay threshold to decide whether to select a delayed observation to be included into an out-of-sequence filter

  • This paper introduces a measure of the merit of a delayed observation based on the gain given by the ideal filter that reprocesses all newer observations every time a delayed observation arrives

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Sensor observations or measurements are received out-ofsequence (OOS); that is, the observations arrive at the filter in a different order than they were measured. Standard filtering techniques (such as the Kalman filter) cannot be used directly when data arrive out-of-sequence, several techniques for incorporating these delayed observations have been developed. When a delayed observation arrives at a filter, an out-of-sequence filter can use that observation to improve the accuracy of the estimate. There are a few reasons why it may be beneficial to drop some of the delayed estimates instead of processing them with the OOS filter. The more an OOS observation has been delayed, the longer it will take to process. Approximate OOS filters (those whose runtime is constant with respect to how delayed an observation is) provide no guarantee that the delayed observation will improve the performance. For these filters, dropping a delayed observation reduces processing time, it has the potential to improve the accuracy of the filter’s estimate As our simulations show, delayed observations can hurt their performance! For these filters, dropping a delayed observation reduces processing time, it has the potential to improve the accuracy of the filter’s estimate

Prior Work
Problem Statement
Contributions
Assumptions
The Delayed Kalman Gain
Preliminaries
The Output of the Kalman Filter as Weighted Sum of Observations
Scalar Case
Numerical Validation
Section 2.5.
Arrowhead Path
Extension to Nonlinear Filter
Conclusions
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.