Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34283129›Full record

ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2021

The Quadrature Method: A Novel Dipole Localisation Algorithm for Artificial Lateral Lines Compared to State of the Art.

Daniël M Bot, Ben J Wolf, Sietse M van Netten

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Daniël M BotI-BioStat, Data Science Institute, Hasselt University, 3500 Hasselt, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-5495-4502
Ben J WolfDelft Center for Systems and Control, Delft University of Technology, 2628 CD Delft, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8024-5352
Sietse M van NettenBernoulli Institute of Mathematics, Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence, Faculty of Science and Engineering, University of Groningen, 9747 AG Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8855-8022

Funding

European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme 635568The Flemish Government Onderzoeksprogramma Artificiële Intelligentie (AI)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The lateral line organ of fish has inspired engineers to develop flow sensor arrays-dubbed artificial lateral lines (ALLs)-capable of detecting near-field hydrodynamic events for obstacle avoidance and object detection. In this paper, we present a comprehensive review and comparison of ten localisation algorithms for ALLs. Differences in the studied domain, sensor sensitivity axes, and available data prevent a fair comparison between these algorithms from their original works. We compare them with our novel quadrature method (QM), which is based on a geometric property specific to 2D-sensitive ALLs. We show how the area in which each algorithm can accurately determine the position and orientation of a simulated dipole source is affected by (1) the amount of training and optimisation data, and (2) the sensitivity axes of the sensors. Overall, we find that each algorithm benefits from 2D-sensitive sensors, with alternating sensitivity axes as the second-best configuration. From the machine learning approaches, an MLP required an impractically large training set to approach the optimisation-based algorithms' performance. Regardless of the data set size, QM performs best with both a large area for accurate predictions and a small tail of large errors.

Indexed as

Lateral Line SystemAlgorithmsAnimalsFishesHydrodynamicsMachine Learningartificial lateral linedipole localisationhydrodynamic imagingneural networks

Identifiers

PMID34283129
PMCPMC8271408

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.