Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Emil Fritz

dblp:359/5744 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Systems, architecture and hardware · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Robot navigation and mapping · 94% 3D vision · 6%

Topics — the 6 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Robotics › Robot navigation and mapping › localization › odometry › radar odometry
doppler-based odometry
0.812024
Do we need scan-matching in radar odometry? · ICRA 2024
Robotics › Robot navigation and mapping › localization
odometry
0.812024
Do we need scan-matching in radar odometry? · ICRA 2024
Robotics › Robot navigation and mapping › localization › odometry
radar odometry
0.812024
Do we need scan-matching in radar odometry? · ICRA 2024
Robotics › Robot navigation and mapping
scan matching
0.812024
Do we need scan-matching in radar odometry? · ICRA 2024
Computer vision › 3D vision › motion estimation
ego-motion estimation
0.212024
Do we need scan-matching in radar odometry? · ICRA 2024
Robotics › Robot navigation and mapping
localization
0.212024
Do we need scan-matching in radar odometry? · ICRA 2024

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

sensor fusion · 0.8scan-to-scan registration · 0.8scan-to-map registration · 0.8kalman filter · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 Do we need scan-matching in radar odometry?
abstract
There is a current increase in the development of "4D" Doppler-capable radar and lidar range sensors that produce 3D point clouds where all points also have information about the radial velocity relative to the sensor. 4D radars in particular are interesting for object perception and navigation in low-visibility conditions (dust, smoke) where lidars and cameras typically fail. With the advent of high-resolution Doppler-capable radars comes the possibility of estimating odometry from single point clouds, foregoing the need for scan registration which is error-prone in feature-sparse field environments. We compare several odometry estimation methods, from direct integration of Doppler/IMU data and Kalman filter sensor fusion to 3D scan-to-scan and scan-to-map registration, on three datasets with data from two recent 4D radars and two IMUs. Surprisingly, our results show that the odometry from Doppler and IMU data alone give similar or better results than 3D point cloud registration. In our experiments, the position drift can be as low as 0.9% over 1.8 and 4.5km trajectories. That allows accurate estimation of 6-DOF ego-motion over long distances also in feature-sparse mine environments. These results are useful not least for applications of navigation with resource-constrained robot platforms in feature-sparse and low-visibility conditions such as mining, construction, and search & rescue operations.
Vladimir Kubelka, Emil Fritz, Martin Magnusson 0002
ICRA2