ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Erroneous Vehicle Velocity Estimation Correction Using Anisotropic Magnetoresistive (AMR) Sensors.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Design of Acoustic Signal for Positioning of Smart Devices.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Magnetic field sensors installed in the road infrastructure can be used for autonomous traffic flow parametrization. Although the main goal of such a measuring system is the recognition of the class of vehicle and classification, velocity is the essential parameter for further calculation and it must be estimated with high reliability. In-field test campaigns, during actual traffic conditions, showed that commonly accepted velocity estimation methods occasionally produce highly erroneous results. For anomaly detection, we propose a criterion and two different correction algorithms. Non-linear signal rescaling and time-based segmentation algorithms are presented and compared for faulty result mitigation. The first one consists of suppressing the highly distorted signal peaks and looking for the best match with cross-correlation. The second approach relies on signals segmentation according to the feature points and multiple cross-correlation comparisons. The proposed two algorithms are evaluated with a dataset of over 300 magnetic signatures of a vehicle from unconstraint traffic conditions. Results show that the proposed criteria highlight all greatly faulty results and that the correction algorithms reduce the maximum error by twofold, but due to the increased mean error, mitigation technics shall be used explicitly with distorted signals.
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.