ArticlePloS one2025
Robust unmanned aerial vehicles tracking amid electronic interference utilizing auxiliary particle filtering.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Electronic interference poses a significant challenge to Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) tracking systems, compromising navigation accuracy and operational safety in critical applications such as surveillance, disaster response, and infrastructure inspection. This study introduces a novel application of the Auxiliary Particle Filter (APF) for robust UAV tracking under interference conditions, focusing on fixed-reference scenarios. The APF incorporates adaptive proposal distributions and robust weight updates to effectively mitigate interference-induced measurement errors. Through comprehensive simulation that evaluates performance under varying interference and sensor degradation scenarios, the APF demonstrates superior accuracy, achieving a mean Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) of 4.82 meters with low variability ([Formula: see text]m). This significantly outperforms traditional filters, including the Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) and Unscented Kalman Filter (UKF). Notably, the APF maintains stable performance even under severe interference conditions, where conventional approaches exhibit substantial degradation. Statistical validation confirms these improvements across all test scenarios (p < 0.001). The detailed implementation guidelines provided in this study enable adoption across diverse operational contexts. These findings establish the APF as a robust and reliable solution for interference-prone environments and lay the groundwork for its adaptation to more dynamic tracking scenarios in autonomous UAV operations.
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.