Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36991881›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Proposals for Surmounting Sensor Noises.

Andre Pittella, Timothy Sands

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. 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

2 authors.

Andre PittellaSibley School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14850, USA.
Timothy SandsDepartment of Mechanical Engineering (SCPD), Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4681-7919

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Classical and optimal control architectures for motion mechanics in the presence of noisy sensors use different algorithms and calculations to perform and control any number of physical demands, to varying degrees of accuracy and precision in regards to the system meeting the desired end state. To circumvent the deleterious effects of noisy sensors, a variety of control architectures are suggested, and their performances are tested for the purpose of comparison through the means of a Monte Carlo simulation that simulates how different parameters might vary under noise, representing real-world imperfect sensors. We find that improvements in one figure of merit often come at a cost in the performance in the others, especially depending on the presence of noise in the system sensors. If sensor noise is negligible, open-loop optimal control performs the best. However, in the overpowering presence of sensor noise, using a control law inversion patching filter performs as the best replacement, but has significant computational strain. The control law inversion filter produces state mean accuracy matching mathematically optimal results while reducing deviation by 36%. Meanwhile, rate sensor issues were more strongly ameliorated with 500% improved mean and 30% improved deviation. Inverting the patching filter is innovative but consequently understudied and lacks well-known equations to use for tuning gains. Therefore, such a patching filter has the additional drawback of having to be tuned through trial and error.

Indexed as

feedbackoptimizationreal-time optimizationsensor fusionsensor noisevelocity-based controller

Identifiers

PMID36991881
PMCPMC10058630

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.