Driving-Condition Dependent and Monte Carlo Simulation-Based Optimization Method for a Bayesian Localization Filter for Parking

In this article, a method for the automated adaptive tuning of a Bayesian localization filter is investigated, since the tuning parameters were often only empirically determined and constantly set. The method is applied to a previously developed Bayesian localization filter called Odometry 2.0 estimator. Its architecture makes it feasible to individually combine different dead-reckoning models because the input is redundant. However, under different driving-conditions (DCs), in particular when parking, the models have individual advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, different cluster analysis methods are examined in order to automatically divide a parking maneuver into different useful segments and to enable dc-dependent optimization. In the next step these segments and statistical error and coefficient models serve as input for a Monte Carlo Simulation (MCS). The error model provides potential sensor errors to ensure robust filter tuning and the coefficient model provides randomly found filter settings in the large parameter space. Finally, the MCS results and ground truth data are used for the optimization to find the filter tuning with minor model errors. The application of the so found adaptive tuning setting shows a significant increase in the robustness of the localization filter.

[1]  Ruben Martinez-Cantin,et al.  BayesOpt: a Bayesian optimization library for nonlinear optimization, experimental design and bandits , 2014, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[2]  Frank Gauterin,et al.  Odometry 2.0: A Slip-Adaptive EIF-Based Four-Wheel-Odometry Model for Parking , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles.

[3]  Sten Bay Jørgensen,et al.  A Generalized Autocovariance Least-Squares Method for Covariance Estimation , 2007, 2007 American Control Conference.

[4]  Frank Gauterin,et al.  Dual-Bayes Localization Filter Extension for Safeguarding in the Case of Uncertain Direction Signals , 2018, Sensors.

[5]  Samik Raychaudhuri,et al.  Introduction to Monte Carlo simulation , 2008, 2008 Winter Simulation Conference.

[6]  Vinay A. Bavdekar,et al.  Identification of process and measurement noise covariance for state and parameter estimation using extended Kalman filter , 2011 .

[7]  T. Powell,et al.  Automated Tuning of an Extended Kalman Filter Using the Downhill Simplex Algorithm , 2002 .

[8]  Sadaaki Miyamoto,et al.  Hierarchical clustering algorithms with automatic estimation of the number of clusters , 2017, 2017 Joint 17th World Congress of International Fuzzy Systems Association and 9th International Conference on Soft Computing and Intelligent Systems (IFSA-SCIS).

[9]  Wolfgang Ertel,et al.  Grundkurs Künstliche Intelligenz , 2021, Computational Intelligence.

[10]  Hoon Kim,et al.  Monte Carlo Statistical Methods , 2000, Technometrics.

[11]  Radford M. Neal Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning , 2007, Technometrics.

[12]  Fridtjof Stein,et al.  Method for determining the proper motion of a vehicle , 2005 .

[13]  Simon J. Julier,et al.  Weak in the NEES?: Auto-Tuning Kalman Filters with Bayesian Optimization , 2018, 2018 21st International Conference on Information Fusion (FUSION).

[14]  Jan Palczewski,et al.  Monte Carlo Simulation , 2008, Encyclopedia of GIS.

[15]  James C. Bezdek,et al.  Pattern Recognition with Fuzzy Objective Function Algorithms , 1981, Advanced Applications in Pattern Recognition.

[16]  James B. Rawlings,et al.  Estimation of the disturbance structure from data using semidefinite programming and optimal weighting , 2009, Autom..

[17]  Ralf Mikut,et al.  Data Mining in der Medizin und Medizintechnik , 2008 .

[18]  Deok-Jin Lee,et al.  Nonlinear Estimation and Multiple Sensor Fusion Using Unscented Information Filtering , 2008, IEEE Signal Processing Letters.

[19]  Frank Gauterin,et al.  GNSS-shortages-resistant and self-adaptive rear axle kinematic parameter estimator (SA-RAKPE) , 2017, 2017 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV).