ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Error Analysis of Accelerometer- and Magnetometer-Based Stationary Alignment.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analytical Formulation of Relationship Between Sensors and Euler Angle Errors for Arbitrary Stationary Alignment Based on Accelerometer and Magnetometer.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Multi-Position Inertial Alignment Method for Underground Pipelines Using Data Backtracking Based on Single-Axis FOG/MIMU.Micromachines · 2024Article
- Research on Gradient-Descent Extended Kalman Attitude Estimation Method for Low-Cost MARG.Micromachines · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This paper revisits the stationary attitude initialization problem, i.e., the stationary alignment, of Attitude and Heading Reference Systems (AHRSs). A detailed and comprehensive error analysis is proposed for four of the most representative accelerometer- and magnetometer-based stationary attitude determination methods, namely, the Three-Axis Attitude Determination (TRIAD), the QUaternion ESTimator (QUEST), the Factored Quaternion Algorithm (FQA), and the Arc-TANgent (ATAN). For the purpose of the error analysis, constant biases in the accelerometer and magnetometer measurements are considered (encompassing, hence, the effect of hard-iron magnetism), in addition to systematic errors in the local gravity and Earth magnetic field models (flux density magnitude, declination angle, and inclination angle). The contributions of this paper are novel closed-form formulae for the residual errors (normality, orthogonality, and alignment errors) developed in the computed Direction Cosine Matrices (DCM). As a consequence, analytical insight is provided into the problem, allowing us to properly compare the performance of the investigated alignment formulations (in terms of ultimate accuracy), as well as to remove some misleading conclusions reported in previous works. The adequacy of the proposed error analysis is validated through simulation and experimental results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.