This invention relates generally to the satellite positioning field, and more specifically to new and useful systems and methods for distributed dense network processing of satellite positioning data.
Being able to perform high precision satellite positioning is important for a wide variety of applications. Unfortunately, current GPS solutions are often either inaccurate or require processor power beyond the capabilities of inexpensive hardware (either locally or in the cloud). A number of solutions have been proposed to address this problem, including Network Real Time Kinematic (Network RTK) satellite positioning. Unfortunately, in traditional methods of Network RTK, the input parameter space increases non-linearly with the size of the network, making it very computationally costly to increase the network size (and thus coverage area and/or positioning accuracy). Therefore, there is the need in the satellite positioning field to create systems and methods for distributed dense network processing of satellite positioning data. This invention provides such new and useful systems and methods.
The following description of the invention embodiments of the invention is not intended to limit the invention to these invention embodiments, but rather to enable any person skilled in the art to make and use this invention.
1. Traditional GNSS, PPP, and RTK
Traditional satellite positioning systems (e.g., standard GNSS) work by attempting to align a local copy (at a receiver) of a pseudorandom binary sequence with a satellite-transmitted copy of the same sequence; because the satellite is far from the receiver, the signal transmitted by the satellite is delayed. By delaying the local copy of the sequence to match up with the satellite-transmitted copy, the time it takes the signal to travel from the satellite to the receiver can be found, which can in turn be used to calculate the distance between the satellite and receiver. By performing this process for multiple satellites (typically four or more), a position of the receiver relative to the satellites can be found, which can in turn be used to find the position in a particular geographic coordinate system (e.g., latitude, longitude, and elevation). Typical GNSS systems can achieve at best 2 m accuracy in positioning.
For many applications (e.g., guidance for human-carrying autonomous vehicles/drones/agricultural equipment, GPS/GNSS research, surveying), this level of accuracy is woefully inadequate. In response, two position correction algorithms have been developed: precise point positioning (PPP) and real time kinematic (RTK).
Instead of solely using the positioning code broadcast by satellites, PPP and RTK also make use of satellite signal carrier phase to determine position. While much higher accuracy is possible using carrier phase data, accurately determining position of a mobile receiver (i.e., the receiver for which position is to be calculated) requires accounting for a number of potential sources of error. Further, carrier phase measurements are ambiguous; because the carrier signal is uniform, it may not be possible to differentiate between a phase shift of φ and 2πN+φ using phase measurements alone, where N is an integer. For example, it may be difficult to determine the difference between a phase shift of π radians and a phase shift of 3π radians (or −π, 5π, etc.).
PPP attempts to solve this issue by explicitly modeling the error present in mobile receiver phase and code measurements. Some errors are global or nearly global (e.g., satellite orbit and clock errors); for these errors, PPP typically uses correction data with highly accurate measurements. However, for local errors (i.e., error that is substantially dependent on mobile receiver location), PPP is only capable of very rough modeling. Fortunately, many local errors change slowly in time; resultantly, PPP can achieve high accuracy with only a single receiver, but may require a long convergence time to precisely determine local errors. As the terms are used in the present application, “global error” refers to any error that does not vary substantially across multiple reference stations within a region, while “local error” refers to error that does vary substantially across multiple reference stations (because the error is specific to a reference station and/or because the error varies substantially over position within the region). As this error pertains to positioning, such errors may also be referred to as “global positioning error” and “local positioning error”.
RTK avoids a large majority of the modeling present in PPP by use of GNSS reference stations (with precisely known locations); since a reference station is local to the mobile receiver, differencing the reference station and mobile receiver signals can result in greatly reduced error. The result is that RTK solutions can converge much more quickly than PPP solutions (and without the high accuracy global corrections data needed by PPP). However, RTK solutions require the presence of base stations near a mobile receiver.
2. System
A system 100 for distributed dense network processing of satellite positioning data includes a global correction module 110, a plurality of local correction modules 120, and a correction generator 140, as shown in
The system 100 functions to generate correction data to be used by a mobile GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System) receiver or any other GNSS receiver for which position/velocity/timing data correction is desired. Such a receiver (henceforth referred to as a mobile receiver) may operate on any satellite navigation system; e.g., GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, and Beidou. The correction data is preferably used to improve GNSS solution accuracy, and may take the form of PPP corrections, RTK corrections, or any other type of corrections (discussed in the section on the correction generator 140.
Flexibility in the form of corrections data is an inherent and distinguishing aspect of the system 100 over traditional position correction systems. Rather than attempting to generate corrections solely from a small set of high-quality global reference stations (as in PPP) or by comparing data in mobile receiver/reference station pairs (as in RTK), the system 100 collects data from reference stations (and/or other reference sources), and instead of (or in addition to) applying this data directly to generate connections, the data is used to generate both a global correction model (in the global correction module 110) and a number of local correction models (in local correction modules 120). Output of these models are then passed to the correction generator 140, which can use said output to generate correction data in any form. Further, the correction generator 140 may cache and/or (with use of the interpolator 130 spatially interpolate corrections data to provide high quality corrections to mobile receivers regardless of correction capability (e.g., whether the receiver can process RTK/PPP corrections) and location of individual base stations.
By operating in this manner, the system 100 may provide a set of corrections that (while usable with PPP receivers) suffers from little of PPP's long convergence time issues, with solution complexity scaling directly with the number of reference stations N (unlike RTK, in which solution complexity scales at least with the number of possible pairs; i.e., N2. In fact, many current solutions scale with N3 or worse). Further, since corrections are preferably calculated using local correction models that may depend on any number of single reference stations (rather than specific reference station pairs), corrections are substantially more robust to loss of a base station.
Further, the flexible nature of the system 100 enables some functions (such as spatial interpolation and caching) to be performed much more generally than would be possible with RTK; while the concept of a “virtual reference station” is known within RTK (also referred to as a “pseudo reference station”), virtual reference stations typically involve the interpolation of RTK corrections data in real time (and, as discussed before, error correction scales in complexity with N2). In contrast, interpolation in the system 100 can be limited to specific aspects of global and/or local corrections models, providing more robustness to error and better insight as to error causes. Further, unlike RTK, which requires real-time corrections data, the model-based system 100 may cache or otherwise retain model parameters even when data is limited (e.g., when a reference station suddenly becomes unavailable).
The system 100 is preferably implemented in software as part of a networked distributed computing system, but may additionally or alternatively be implemented in any manner.
The global correction module 110 functions to maintain one or more global correction models. Global correction models preferably accomplish two functions—correcting for global error (i.e., error in GNSS positioning that does not vary substantially in space) and error-checking/seeding local error estimates (where local error refers to error that does vary substantially in space or per GNSS receiver). Note that seeding here refers to providing a coarse estimate as a starting point for further refinement.
The global correction module 110 preferably takes as input raw data from reference stations and the mobile receiver (e.g., carrier phase data, pseudorange data, reference station location etc.) but may additionally or alternatively take in processed data from reference stations and/or the mobile receiver (e.g., positioning code data) or data from any other source (e.g., PPP global corrections data sources on the internet, calibration data for particular satellites or receiver types from a manufacturer or other source, satellite orbit data, satellite clock data).
The reference stations utilized by the system 100 are preferably public reference stations, but may additionally or alternatively be private reference stations or any other suitable reference stations.
Reference stations preferably have a location known to a high degree of accuracy. Reference station location is preferably the location of the antenna used to receive satellite signals. Reference station location may be determined in any manner yielding a high degree of accuracy; for example, reference station location may be determined by a number of receivers set around the reference station at vertical and horizontal reference points. Note that while reference stations are preferably fixed in location, they may additionally or alternatively be mobile. Station position is preferably re-determined to high accuracy before moved reference stations re-start providing phase data; additionally or alternatively, reference stations may provide phase data before location re-determination (for example, for use in attitude estimation; alternatively, data may be provided but not used). As another alternative, reference stations may not provide absolute location data at all if not needed; for example, absolute location data of the reference station may not be needed for applications including attitude estimation. Note that fixed reference stations may, over time, “self-survey” their own positions to a reasonably high degree of accuracy.
Reference stations preferably provide phase data for multiple satellite signals and the location of the reference station via the internet, but may additionally or alternatively provide data by any other suitable method (e.g., transmission by UHF-band radio modem). Reference station data is preferably made available directly to the system 100, but may additionally or alternatively be processed or aggregated before being made available to the system 100.
Reference stations preferably have one or more satellite receivers and generate corrections based on those receivers. The number and quality of satellite receivers used by a reference station (or other factors, like antenna type/size/location) may determine the accuracy of reference station data. Reference stations (or other sources of reference station data; e.g., a reference source that creates correction data from multiple reference stations) may be ordered or grouped by reference station quality (e.g., accuracy of corrections) and/or locality (e.g., if corrections are desired for a particular mobile receiver, reference stations may be ordered or grouped by distance to that receiver).
The global correction module 110 preferably explicitly models the effects of global parameters on GNSS navigation. These parameters preferably include satellite clock error, satellite orbit error, satellite hardware bias, satellite antenna phase windup, phase center offset (PCO), and phase center variation (PCV) (all of which are per satellite, but generally do not vary spatially), solid earth tides, solid earth pole tides, ocean tidal loading (which vary spatially and temporally, but in a predictable manner), as well as coarse global models of ionospheric and tropospheric effects (in this case, global models may not be accurate enough by themselves to model ionospheric and tropospheric effects, but they provide a starting point for later refinement). Additionally or alternatively, the global correction module 110 may model the effects of any parameters on GNSS signals as received by a mobile receiver or a reference station. The global correction module 110 preferably additionally maintains uncertainty estimates for at least some global parameters; additionally or alternatively, the global correction module 110 may not maintain uncertainty estimates.
Note that for receivers used in generating/updating the global model, the global correction module 110 may additionally or alternatively model effects unique to those receivers; e.g., receiver clock error, receiver hardware bias, and receiver antenna phase windup/PCO/PCV (which are unique to a given receiver but not directly dependent on location).
The plurality of local correction modules 120 function to maintain local correction models. Local correction models preferably correct for spatially local variance of effects on GNSS signals as well as for effects that are specific to particular receivers/reference stations.
Local correction modules 120 preferably correspond to (and receive data from) a single reference station. In some embodiments, a local correction module 120 exists for each reference source or station, such that each local correction module 120 takes input from a unique reference source. Additionally or alternatively, local correction modules 120 may correspond to and/or couple to reference stations in any manner; for example, a local correction module 120 may be used to model a number of reference stations within a particular spatial region. Additionally or alternatively, the system 100 may include one or more local correction modules 120 corresponding to mobile receivers.
A local correction module 120 preferably takes as input raw data from corresponding reference stations/mobile receivers (e.g., carrier phase data, positioning code data, reference station location, pseudorange, navigation data, message data, etc.) but may additionally or alternatively take in processed data from reference stations and/or the mobile receiver (e.g., broadcast ephemerides and almanacs) or data from any other source. The local correction module 120 preferably additionally takes data from the global correction module 120 (e.g., to initialize a local correction model for a new reference station and/or to compensate for global components of local error). Additionally or alternatively, the local correction module 120 may take data from any source (e.g., the local correction module 120 may take in only reference data and not any output of the global correction module 110).
The local correction module 120 preferably explicitly models the effects of local parameters on GNSS navigation. These parameters preferably include tropospheric and ionospheric effects (which are not directly dependent on reference station but vary spatially/temporally), receiver clock error, receiver hardware bias, receiver antenna phase windup/PCO/PCV (which are unique to a given receiver/antenna but not directly dependent on location), carrier phase ambiguity, and other position error (which covers effects not otherwise explicitly modeled). Additionally or alternatively, the local correction module 120 may model the effects of any parameters on GNSS signals as received by a mobile receiver or a reference station. Like the global correction module 110, the local correction module 120 may additionally or alternatively maintain/track parameter uncertainty estimates.
In particular, the local correction module 120 preferably models tropospheric and ionospheric effects as a function of receiver position.
Ionospheric effects may be difficult to model. It is difficult to differentiate the effects on GNSS signals of ionospheric effects from those of receiver hardware bias; however, ionospheric effects tend to vary more quickly in time than receiver hardware bias. Accordingly, local correction modules 120 may attempt to separate ionospheric effects and effects of hardware bias based on rate of change of the combination of these effects. Further, ionospheric effects vary significantly (and not in an easily predictable manner) based not only on position, but also based on the path a GNSS signal takes through the ionosphere. Accordingly, a model of ionospheric effects may need to take each of these factors into account. In one implementation of an invention embodiment, local correction modules 120 model ionospheric effects per GNSS source (e.g., per satellite) as a function of both position (e.g., pierce point—where the line of sight between a receiver and a satellite intersects the atmospheric layer) and pierce angle (e.g., as an analogue for the signal path), as shown in
In contrast, tropospheric effects are not substantially variant in frequency (for most satellite frequencies); further, while tropospheric effects do depend on angle, they typically do so in a predictable manner. Accordingly, local correction models preferably model tropospheric effects solely based on position (e.g., pierce point) with a static correction for angle (roughly corresponding to 1/cos θ where θ is the angle from vertical). Additionally or alternatively, tropospheric effects may be modeled in any manner.
Models of the global correction module 110 and local correction modules 120 are preferably weakly coupled; that is, changes in model in either case propagate to each other, but in a damped manner (which allows for reaction to changing conditions without bad data or reference station loss causing correction accuracy to break down). Additionally or alternatively, the models may be coupled in any manner (or not at all).
Models of the global correction module 110 and local correction modules 120 are preferably maintained/updated via a Kalman filter or Gaussian process, but may additionally or alternatively be maintained/updated in any manner.
The global correction module 110 and local correction modules 120 may use any set(s) of reference sources. For example, the local correction modules 120 may use a strict subset of reference sources used by the global correction module 110 (e.g., the subset of reference sources within a range threshold of a mobile receiver), or the global correction module 110 may use a strict subset of reference sources used by the local correction modules 120 (e.g., the subset of local reference sources with highest accuracy). As a second example, the local correction modules 120 and global correction module 110 may use overlapping reference sources (but neither set a subset of the other). As a third example, the local correction modules 120 and global correction module 110 may use non-overlapping sets of reference sources (i.e., they do not share a reference source). Likewise, these reference sources may receive satellite information from any set(s) of satellites.
The output of the global correction module 110 and local correction modules 120 may be referred to as “pre-corrections” and may be generated in any form usable by the correction generator 140 to generate correction data. Pre-corrections generated by the global correction module 110 may be referred to as “global pre-corrections”, while pre-corrections generated by a local correction module 120 may be referred to as “local pre-corrections”.
In a variation of an invention embodiment, the global correction module 110 includes a differenced ambiguity fixer (DAF) 111 that calculates carrier phase ambiguity for some reference station pairs. This differenced ambiguity fixer may be used, for instance, to help initialize new reference stations in global and local models more rapidly. Alternatively, the DAF 111 may be independent of the global correction module 110.
The interpolator 130 functions to interpolate spatially variant effects of the system 100. In particular, the interpolator 130 preferably functions to transform per reference station models of local tropospheric and ionospheric effects into a local (reference-station independent, but position dependent) model of local tropospheric and ionospheric effects. For example, the interpolator 130 may transform a set of tropospheric effect models corresponding to individual reference locations (each having a known position) to a regularly spaced grid. Additionally or alternatively, the interpolator 130 may function in any manner (e.g., by creating a continuous interpolated model of tropospheric/ionospheric effects rather than a discrete grid, or using some other arrangement of discrete points than a grid pattern). Note that any interpolation technique may be used; for example, kriging may be used (this technique has the advantage of also predicting uncertainty at the interpolated points). In general, the local position dependent model may be referred to as a “unified position-based model” (since it unifies the output of multiple models corresponding to individual reference sources).
The interpolator 130 may additionally or alternatively function to separate ionospheric effects and effects of hardware bias; for example, local correction modules 120 may output to the interpolator 130 both ionospheric and hardware bias estimates (optionally including a term characterizing the correlation between these estimates), and from these estimates attempt to fit a unified (spatially variant) ionospheric model to the data (after which hardware bias estimates for each reference source may be refined). For example, each local correction module 120 (LCMi) may output an ionospheric correction Ii(x, y, z) and a hardware bias correction Hi. At the local correction module 120 these corrections may be improperly separated; e.g., Ii=Ii(ideal)+Δi, Hi=Hi(ideal)−Δi, but because the ionospheric estimates should fit the same model, the interpolator 130 can use measurements from multiple reference sources to refine estimates of both ionospheric correction and hardware bias correction.
The correction generator 140 functions to generate corrections to be used by the mobile receiver. The correction generator 140 preferably generates corrections based on output of the global correction module 110 and the local correction modules 120 for a mobile receiver in a form usable by the mobile receiver. For example, if the mobile receiver can accept PPP corrections, the correction generator 140 may send corrections in the form of PPP corrections (though, in contrast to true PPP corrections, the corrections generated by the correction generator 140 may depend upon receiver position estimate or another spatial term). Additionally or alternatively, the correction generator 140 may send corrections in the form of RTK corrections (e.g., of a virtual reference station), or in any other form (e.g., some sort of local coefficients that are part of a local model). Note that local and global corrections may happen in any order (and may be synchronous or asynchronous). The correction generator 140 may additionally or alternatively send or use correction data in any manner to correct position data (e.g., the correction generator 140 may take as input position data and generate corrected position data rather than a positioning correction to be implemented by, say, a mobile receiver).
The correction generator 140 preferably caches model output and generates corrections using this cache. Accordingly, in the absence of some real-time data, cached data may be substituted (not possible in traditional RTK). Additionally or alternatively, new parameters may be estimated based on a predicted variation in time (e.g., predicted from cached values), or the correction generator 140 may not rely on cached and/or predicted outputs.
The correction generator 140 may additionally or alternatively calculate estimated uncertainty in the generated corrections given uncertainty in the input parameters (traditional PPP/RTK solutions are not capable of doing this).
2. Method
A method 200 for distributed dense network processing of satellite positioning data includes receiving data from a set of reference stations S210, updating a global GNSS correction model S220, updating a set of local GNSS correction models S230, and generating GNSS corrections S240, as shown in
The method 200 preferably functions in a substantially similar manner to the system 100.
Receiving data from a set of reference stations S210 functions to receive input data used to update global and local GNSS correction models, substantially similar to as described in the system 100.
Updating a global GNSS correction model S220 functions to update a global correction model substantially similar to that of the global correction module 110; this model preferably accomplishes two functions—correcting for global error (i.e., error in GNSS positioning that does not vary substantially in space) and error-checking/seeding local error estimates. Updates are preferably performed as described in the system 100 description.
Updating a set of local GNSS correction models S230 functions to update local correction models substantially similar to that of the local correction module 120; these models preferably correct for spatially local variance of effects on GNSS signals as well as for effects that are specific to particular receivers/reference stations. Updates are preferably performed as described in the system 100 description.
Generating GNSS corrections S240 functions to generate corrections from global and local correction models to be used by a mobile receiver. Generating GNSS corrections preferably includes generating corrections as described in the sections on the correction generator 140; additionally or alternatively, as part of this generation process, S240 may include performing interpolation (as described in the section on the interpolator 130). Likewise, S240 may include caching model output and generating corrections from this cache. Accordingly, in the absence of some real-time data, cached data may be substituted (this is not possible in traditional RTK).
The method 200 is preferably implemented by the system 100 but may additionally or alternatively be implemented by any system for distributed dense network processing of satellite position data.
The methods of the preferred embodiment and variations thereof can be embodied and/or implemented at least in part as a machine configured to receive a computer-readable medium storing computer-readable instructions. The instructions are preferably executed by computer-executable components preferably integrated with a system for distributed dense network processing of satellite position data. The computer-readable medium can be stored on any suitable computer-readable media such as RAMs, ROMs, flash memory, EEPROMs, optical devices (CD or DVD), hard drives, floppy drives, or any suitable device. The computer-executable component is preferably a general or application specific processor, but any suitable dedicated hardware or hardware/firmware combination device can alternatively or additionally execute the instructions.
As a person skilled in the art will recognize from the previous detailed description and from the figures and claims, modifications and changes can be made to the preferred embodiments of the invention without departing from the scope of this invention defined in the following claims.
This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 17/347,874 filed 15 Jun. 2021, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/589,932, filed 1 Oct. 2019, which is a continuation of U.S. application patent application Ser. No. 16/195,427, filed on 19 Nov. 2018, now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 10,473,790, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 62/587,741, filed on 17 Nov. 2017, all of which are incorporated in their entirety by this reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5490076 | Rawicz et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5610614 | Talbot et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
6427122 | Lin | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6453237 | Fuchs et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6552680 | Barber et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6647340 | Pemble et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6691066 | Brodie | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6727849 | Kirk et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6753810 | Yang et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6816117 | Fink et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6856905 | Pasturel et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
6864836 | Hatch et al. | Mar 2005 | B1 |
7026982 | Toda et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7158885 | Janky et al. | Jan 2007 | B1 |
7219013 | Young et al. | May 2007 | B1 |
7289061 | Komjathy et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7292183 | Bird et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7298325 | Krikorian et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7382313 | Goad | Jun 2008 | B1 |
7409289 | Coatantiec et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7538721 | Vollath et al. | May 2009 | B2 |
7692578 | Vollath et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7696922 | Nicholson et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
8089402 | Maenpa et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8094065 | Henkel | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8134497 | Janky et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
8193976 | Shen et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8255155 | Crane et al. | Aug 2012 | B1 |
8416133 | Hatch et al. | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8447517 | Roh | May 2013 | B2 |
8542146 | Vollath | Sep 2013 | B2 |
8587475 | Leandro | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8610624 | Savoy | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8756001 | Georgy et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8760343 | Milyutin et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8825456 | Vasudevan et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8860609 | Roh | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8996311 | Morin et al. | Mar 2015 | B1 |
9031782 | Lemay et al. | May 2015 | B1 |
9069073 | Ramakrishnan et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9128176 | Seeger | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9182497 | Geier et al. | Nov 2015 | B2 |
9405012 | Doucet et al. | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9405016 | Yim | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9417330 | Revol et al. | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9557422 | Miller et al. | Jan 2017 | B1 |
9568321 | Bharadwaj et al. | Feb 2017 | B2 |
9576082 | Sparks et al. | Feb 2017 | B2 |
9602974 | Rudow et al. | Mar 2017 | B2 |
9612341 | Large et al. | Apr 2017 | B2 |
9671501 | Leandro et al. | Jun 2017 | B2 |
9709683 | Leandro et al. | Jul 2017 | B2 |
9784844 | Kana et al. | Oct 2017 | B2 |
9857474 | Tan et al. | Jan 2018 | B2 |
9927530 | Boyarski | Mar 2018 | B2 |
9933528 | Horn et al. | Apr 2018 | B2 |
10018729 | Dunik et al. | Jul 2018 | B2 |
10101464 | Appleford et al. | Oct 2018 | B2 |
10191157 | Dai et al. | Jan 2019 | B2 |
10260888 | Takahashi | Apr 2019 | B2 |
10274606 | Phan et al. | Apr 2019 | B1 |
10422885 | Dai et al. | Sep 2019 | B2 |
10459593 | Tiwari et al. | Oct 2019 | B2 |
10473790 | Noble et al. | Nov 2019 | B2 |
10578747 | Grgich et al. | Mar 2020 | B2 |
10677933 | Gavrilets et al. | Jun 2020 | B1 |
10802160 | Dai et al. | Oct 2020 | B2 |
10809388 | Carcanague et al. | Oct 2020 | B1 |
10901096 | Thrasher et al. | Jan 2021 | B2 |
11131774 | Miya et al. | Sep 2021 | B2 |
11143762 | Takahashi et al. | Oct 2021 | B2 |
11156718 | Takeda | Oct 2021 | B2 |
11187813 | Brandl et al. | Nov 2021 | B2 |
11221418 | Sleewaegen et al. | Jan 2022 | B2 |
11237276 | Kleeman | Feb 2022 | B2 |
11259141 | Li et al. | Feb 2022 | B2 |
11327182 | Zalewski et al. | May 2022 | B2 |
11333772 | Del Regno et al. | May 2022 | B2 |
11378699 | Segal et al. | Jul 2022 | B2 |
11422269 | Ookubo et al. | Aug 2022 | B2 |
11422271 | Talbot et al. | Aug 2022 | B2 |
11624838 | Fine et al. | Apr 2023 | B2 |
11693120 | Angelo et al. | Jul 2023 | B2 |
11953608 | Hamada | Apr 2024 | B2 |
20020180641 | Fink et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20050001762 | Han et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050001763 | Han et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050024263 | Sharpe et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050114023 | Williamson et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050203702 | Sharpe et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20070055445 | Janky et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070126629 | Krikorian et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20080205521 | Van | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20090018772 | Watanabe et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090184869 | Talbot et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090224969 | Kolb | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090262013 | Vollath | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090273511 | Schroth | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20100033370 | Lopez et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100164789 | Basnayake | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100283675 | McAree et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110050497 | Maenpa et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110090116 | Hatch et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110122022 | Van et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110140959 | Vollath | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110148698 | Vollath | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110187589 | Gaal et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110187590 | Leandro | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110316740 | Waters et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120050097 | Zhang et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120146847 | Janky et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120154210 | Landau et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120154214 | Leandro | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120154215 | Vollath et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120173195 | Opshaug et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120176271 | Dai et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120286991 | Chen et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20130050020 | Peck et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130099970 | Lin et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130227377 | Rao et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130234885 | Geier et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130251150 | Chassagne | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130265191 | Ghinamo | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130271318 | Landau et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130335264 | Revol et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140002300 | Leandro et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140015712 | Leandro et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140062765 | Brenner | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140062776 | Ferguson et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140077991 | Bar-Sever et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140184442 | Large et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140232592 | Psiaki et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140240172 | Milyutin et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140266876 | Tan et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140288825 | Czompo et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20150019464 | Nguyen-Tuong et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150168559 | Salazar et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150173037 | Pijl | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150260848 | Mundt et al. | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20150270615 | Neenan | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20150293230 | Weed et al. | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20150293233 | De Jong | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20150369924 | Hedgecock et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20160011318 | Cohen | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160097859 | Hansen et al. | Apr 2016 | A1 |
20160116601 | Horn et al. | Apr 2016 | A1 |
20160195617 | Phatak et al. | Jul 2016 | A1 |
20160373263 | Zaidi et al. | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20170254904 | Zhodzishsky et al. | Sep 2017 | A1 |
20170269216 | Dai et al. | Sep 2017 | A1 |
20170269222 | Dai et al. | Sep 2017 | A1 |
20170269227 | Dai et al. | Sep 2017 | A1 |
20170269231 | Dai et al. | Sep 2017 | A1 |
20170299730 | Lie et al. | Oct 2017 | A1 |
20170299731 | Lie et al. | Oct 2017 | A1 |
20170322313 | Revol et al. | Nov 2017 | A1 |
20180113219 | Wuebbena | Apr 2018 | A1 |
20180120445 | Dill | May 2018 | A1 |
20180164442 | Thrasher et al. | Jun 2018 | A1 |
20180172838 | Junker et al. | Jun 2018 | A1 |
20180188032 | Ramanandan et al. | Jul 2018 | A1 |
20180246217 | Wuebbena | Aug 2018 | A1 |
20180252818 | Sato et al. | Sep 2018 | A1 |
20180283882 | He et al. | Oct 2018 | A1 |
20180299562 | Green | Oct 2018 | A1 |
20180306930 | Laine et al. | Oct 2018 | A1 |
20190004180 | Jokinen | Jan 2019 | A1 |
20190078895 | Ma et al. | Mar 2019 | A1 |
20190120970 | Mgen et al. | Apr 2019 | A1 |
20190154837 | Noble et al. | May 2019 | A1 |
20190187295 | Lee et al. | Jun 2019 | A1 |
20190187298 | Grgich et al. | Jun 2019 | A1 |
20190204450 | Revol | Jul 2019 | A1 |
20190243001 | Ookubo et al. | Aug 2019 | A1 |
20190302274 | Berntorp et al. | Oct 2019 | A1 |
20190339396 | Turunen | Nov 2019 | A1 |
20190369265 | Jokinen | Dec 2019 | A1 |
20190383948 | Hoeferlin et al. | Dec 2019 | A1 |
20200025936 | Zhou et al. | Jan 2020 | A1 |
20200025937 | Kroeger et al. | Jan 2020 | A1 |
20200041654 | Noble et al. | Feb 2020 | A1 |
20200041658 | Laurichesse | Feb 2020 | A1 |
20200084586 | Rydén et al. | Mar 2020 | A1 |
20200096649 | Brandl et al. | Mar 2020 | A1 |
20200209406 | Lin et al. | Jul 2020 | A1 |
20200233056 | Dolgov et al. | Jul 2020 | A1 |
20200257002 | Henkel | Aug 2020 | A1 |
20200408926 | Carcanague et al. | Dec 2020 | A1 |
20210033735 | Kleeman | Feb 2021 | A1 |
20210116579 | Rezaei | Apr 2021 | A1 |
20210141099 | Gunnarsson et al. | May 2021 | A1 |
20210165104 | Zalewski et al. | Jun 2021 | A1 |
20210165111 | Zalewski | Jun 2021 | A1 |
20210215831 | Takeda | Jul 2021 | A1 |
20210333413 | Zyryanov | Oct 2021 | A1 |
20210372793 | Nikulin et al. | Dec 2021 | A1 |
20220011443 | De Wilde et al. | Jan 2022 | A1 |
20220018969 | Fine et al. | Jan 2022 | A1 |
20220057523 | Lee | Feb 2022 | A1 |
20220058322 | Brandl et al. | Feb 2022 | A1 |
20220107427 | Kleeman et al. | Apr 2022 | A1 |
20220163677 | Muthuraman et al. | May 2022 | A1 |
20220171053 | Park et al. | Jun 2022 | A1 |
20220317310 | He et al. | Oct 2022 | A1 |
20230140535 | Ma et al. | May 2023 | A1 |
20230184956 | Cole et al. | Jun 2023 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2007300586 | Apr 2008 | AU |
2718988 | Jan 2014 | CA |
3079279 | Oct 2020 | CA |
101166995 | Apr 2008 | CN |
103197327 | Jul 2013 | CN |
103760573 | Apr 2014 | CN |
104236522 | Dec 2014 | CN |
104732085 | Jun 2015 | CN |
106338738 | Jan 2017 | CN |
106970404 | Jul 2017 | CN |
107085626 | Aug 2017 | CN |
108196272 | Jun 2018 | CN |
108317949 | Jul 2018 | CN |
108536003 | Sep 2018 | CN |
105629263 | Apr 2019 | CN |
107422354 | Jun 2019 | CN |
111272174 | Jun 2020 | CN |
111879545 | Nov 2020 | CN |
109714421 | Aug 2021 | CN |
114174850 | Mar 2022 | CN |
102017212603 | Jan 2019 | DE |
102018202223 | Aug 2019 | DE |
0244091 | Nov 1987 | EP |
0940945 | Sep 1999 | EP |
1729145 | Dec 2006 | EP |
2128841 | Dec 2009 | EP |
2602752 | Jun 2013 | EP |
1839070 | Apr 2014 | EP |
2966477 | Jan 2016 | EP |
2995975 | Mar 2016 | EP |
3035080 | Jun 2016 | EP |
3627188 | Mar 2020 | EP |
3566021 | Mar 2021 | EP |
3828595 | Jun 2021 | EP |
3963352 | Mar 2022 | EP |
101181990 | Sep 2012 | KR |
02061449 | Aug 2002 | WO |
2017046914 | Mar 2017 | WO |
2017070732 | May 2017 | WO |
2018188845 | Oct 2018 | WO |
2019063645 | Apr 2019 | WO |
2020240307 | Dec 2020 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Abdel-Hafez, M. F., “A High-Integrity and Efficient GPS Integer Ambiguity Resolution Method”, Navigation: Journal of The Institute of Navigation, vol. 50(4), p. 295-310, Winter 2003-2004 (Year: 2004). |
Bijl, Hildo , et al., “Online sparse Gaussian process regression using FITC and PITC approximations”, IFAG-Papers On Line vol. 48, Issue 28, 2015, pp. 703-708 (Year: 2015). |
Brocard, Philippe , et al., “System and Method for Distributed Integrity Monitoring”, U.S. Appl. No. 18/491,167, filed Oct. 20, 2023. |
Cole, D.A. , et al., “Locally induced Gaussian processes for large-scale simulation experiments”, Stat Comput 31, 33 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11222-021-10007-9 (Year: 2021). |
Erickson, Collin B., et al., “Comparison of Gaussian Process Modeling Software”, European Journal of Operational Research 266 (2018) 179-192 (Year: 2018). |
Inyurt, Samed , et al., “Ionospheric TEC Forecasting Using Gaussian Process Regression (GPR) and multiple Linear Regression (M LR) in X Turkey”, Astrophys Space Sci (2020) 365:99, https://doi .org/10.1007 / s10509-020-03817-2 (Year: 2020). |
Lin, Ming , et al., “Robust Gaussian Process Regression for Real-Time High Precision GPS Signal Enhancement”, Applied Data Science Track Paper. KDD '19, Aug. 4-8, 2019, Anchorage, AK, USA (Year: 2019). |
Mobarak, Jason , et al., “System and Method for GNSS Correction Transmission”, U.S. Appl. No. 18/244,567, filed Sep. 11, 2023. |
Parkins, Alex , et al., “System and Method for GNSS Correction Monitoring”, U.S. Appl. No. 18/503,662, filed Nov. 7, 2023. |
Quinonero-Candel, Joaquin , et al., “A Unifying View of Sparse Approximate Gaussian Progress Regression”, Journal of Machine Learning Research 6 (2005) 1939-1959. (Year: 2005). |
Sleewaegen, Jean-Marie , et al., “Galileo E5b Rover Receiving E5a Corrections? No Problem!”, 32nd International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of the Institute of Navigation (ION GNSS+ 2019), Miami, Florida, Sep. 16-20, 2019. |
Smolyakov, Ivan , et al., “System and Method for Determining GNSS Corrections”, U.S. Appl. No. 18/241,542, filed Sep. 1, 2023. |
Subirana, J. S., “Combination of GNSS Measurements, Navipedia”, https://gssc.esa.int/navipedia/index.php?title=Combination_of_GNSS_Measurements (Year: 2011). |
Yang, Y. , et al., “L1 Backup Navigation for Dual Frequency GPS Receiver”, Proceedings of the 16th International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of The Institute of Navigation (ION GPS/GNSS 2003), Portland, OR,. Sep. 2003, pp. 1258-1263. |
Ibrahim, Hassan E., et al., “A Regional Stochastic Model for NOAA-Based Residual Tropospheric Delay”, ION NTM 2008, Jan. 28-30, 2008, San Diego, CA. |
Wubbena, Gerhard , et al., “RTK Networks based on Geo++ GNSMART—Concepts, Implementation, Results”, ION GPS 2001, Sep. 11-14, 2001, Salt Lake City, UT. |
“Road vehicles Functional safety Part 1: Vocabulary”, ISO 26262-1:2018, https://www.iso.org/standard/68383.html, Abstract, published Dec. 2018. |
“The First in China | Bynav Alice GNSS SOC Awarded ISO 26262 ASIL B Functional Safety Product Certification”, Gasgoo, https://autonews.gasgoo.com/m/70028360.html, Sep. 22, 2023. |
Brocard, Philippe , et al., “System and Method for Bounding a Satellite Positioning Solution Integrity”, U.S. Appl. No. 18/537,212, filed Dec. 12, 2023. |
Chen, Liang , et al., “GNSS High-Precision Augmentation for Autonomous Vehicles: Requirements, Solution, and Technical Challenges”, Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 1623. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/rs15061623. |
George, Jitin , “C2000 MCU SafeTI control solutions: An introduction to ASIL decomposition and SIL synthesis”, Texas Instruments, Apr. 2019. |
Nathan, Aaron , “Point One Navigation Launches ASIL Positioning Engine to Enable Safe and Precise Autonomous Vehicles”, Point One Navigation, Dec. 19, 2022, https://pointonenav.com/news/point-one-navigation-launches-asil-positioning-engine/. |
Ward, D. D. , et al., “The Uses and Abuses of ASIL Decomposition in ISO 26262”, 7th IET International Conference on System Safety, incorporating the Cyber Security Conference 2012. |
Schmitz, Martin , “RTCM State Space Representation Messages, Status and Plans”, PPP-RTK & Open Standards Symposium, Mar. 12-13, 2012, Frankfurt, Germany. |
Shapiro, Larry S., et al., “Rejecting Outliers and Estimating Errors in an Orthogonal-Regression Framework”, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Load. A (1995)350, 407-439. (Year: 1995). |
Skog, Isaac , et al., “A Low-Cost GPS Aided Inertial Navigation System for Vehicle Applications”, 2005 13th European Signal Processing Conference, Sep. 4-8, 2005. |
Snelson, Edward , et al., “Sparse Gaussian Process using Pseudo-inputs”, NIPS'05: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, Dec. 2005, pp. 1257-1264. |
Subirana, J. Sanz, et al., “Carrier Phase Cycle-Slip Detection—Navipedia”, https://gssc.esa.int/navipedia/index.php/Carrier_Phase_Cycle-Slip_Detection, published 2011. |
Takasu, Tomoji , et al., “ION GNSS 2008 abstract submission Cycle slip detection and fixing by MEMS IMU/GPS Integration for mobile environment RTK-GPS”, Tokyo University of Marine Science and Technology, ION GNSS 2008, abstract submission. |
Takenaka , et al., “Geolocation Correction for Geostationary Satellite Observations by a Phase-Only Correlation Method Using a Visible Channe”, MPDI, Aug. 1, 2020, retrieved on Oct. 3, 2023. Retrieved from the internet <URL: http://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/12/15/2472>. |
Tanedo, Flip , “Notes on non-holonomic constraints”, For P3318, Spring 2013, https://www.physics.uci.edu/˜tanedo/files/teaching/P3318S13/Sec_05_nonholonomic.pdf. |
Teunissen, P.J.G. , “GNSS Integer Ambiguity Validation: Overview of Theory and Methods”, Proceedings of the ION 2013 Pacific PNT Meeting, Apr. 23-25, 2013, Marriott Waikiki Beach Resort & Spa, Honolulu, Hawaii, https://www.ion.org/publications/abstract.cfm?articleID=11030. |
Teunissen, Peter J.G., et al., “Integer Aperture Estimation A Framework for GNSS Ambiguity Acceptance Testing”, InsideGNSS, Mar./Apr. 2011, pp. 66-73, www.insidegnss.com. |
Teunissen, P.J.G. , “On the GPS widelane and its decorrelating property”, Delft Geodetic Computing Centre, Journal of Geodesy (1997) 71: 577-587. |
Thombre, Sarang , et al., “GNSS Threat Monitoring and Reporting: Past, Present, and a Proposed Future”, The Journal of Navigation, Dec. 2017, DOI: 10.1017/S0373463317000911, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321663256. |
Titsias, Michael K., “Variational Learning of Inducing Variables in Sparse Gaussian Processes”, http://proceedings.mlr.press/v5/titsias09a/titsias09a.pdf, 2009. |
Urquhart, Landon , “An Analysis of Multi-Frequency Carrier Phase Linear Combinations for GNSS”, Department of Geodesy and Geomatics Engineering, University of New Brunswick, Technical Report No. 263, Feb. 2009. |
Urquhart, Landon , et al., “Innovation: Integrity for safe navigation”, https://www.gpsworld.com/innovation-integrity-for-safe-navigation-provided-by-gnss-service/, GPS World, Feb. 12, 2020. |
Van Diggelen, Frank , et al., “Google to improve urban GPS accuracy for apps”, Dec. 9, 2020, Android Developers Blog. |
Van Graas, Frank , et al., “Precise Velocity Estimation Using a Stand-Alone GPS Receiver”, Abstract only, Journal of The Institute of Navigation, vol. 51, No. 4, Winter 2004-2005, pp. 283-292, https://www.ion.org/publications/abstract.cfm?articleID=102384. |
Verhagen, S. , “The GNSS integer ambiguities: Estimation and validation”, Aerospace Engineering, Jan. 31, 2005. |
Waserman, Eyal , et al., “A Mixed Integer Least-Squares Formulation of the GNSS Snapshot Positioning Problem”, https://github.com/eyalw711/snapshot-positioning, Jun. 2, 2021. |
Won, Dachee , et al., “Performance Improvement of Inertial Navigation System by Using Magnetometer with Vehicle Dynamic Constraints”, Hindawi, vol. 2015 | Article ID 435062 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/435062, https://www.hindawi.com/journals/js/2015/435062/. |
Wubbena, Gerhard , et al., “PPP-RTK: Precise Point Positioning Using State-Space Representation in RTK Networks”, Presented at the 18th International Technical Meeting, ION GNSS-05, Sep. 13-16, 2005, Long Beach, California. |
Yang, Wenhao , et al., “An Improved Relative GNSS Tracking Method Utilizing Single Frequency Receivers”, Sensors 2020, 20, 4073; doi:10.3390/s20154073 www.mdpi.com/journal/sensors, 19 pages. |
Zhu, Ni , et al., “GNSS Position Integrity in Urban Environments: A Review of Literature”, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2018, 17p., 10.1109/TITS.2017.2766768.hal-01709519. |
“An Introduction to GNSS, Chapter 4, GNSS Error Sources”, https://novatel.com/an-introduction-to-gnss/chapter-4-gnsserror-sources, published 2015. |
“Geo++ SSR For Network-RTK, PPP and PPP-RTK”, https://geopp.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/SSR_Flyer_v3.pdf, Sep. 2015. |
“IGS State Space Representation (SSR) Format Version 1.00”, International GNSS Service (IGS), Oct. 5, 2020. |
“Integrity-Navipedia”, https://gssc.esa.int/navipedia/index.php/Integrity, published 2011. |
“Phase II of the GNSS Evolutionary Architecture Study”, https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ato/service_units/techops/navservices/gnss/library/documents/media/geasphaseii_final.pdf, Feb. 2010. |
“RAIM”, GMV, 2011, RAIM. |
“Safe Position Augmentation for Real-Time Navigation (SPARTN) Interface Control Document Version 1.8.0”, Jan. 2020, Sapcorda Services GmbH. |
“Swift Navigation Binary Protocol”, Version 3.4.5, Mar. 10, 2021, pp. 1-156. |
Altmayer, Christian , “Cycle Slip Detection and Correction by Means of Integrated Systems”, ION Institute of Navigation, Proceedings of the 200 National Technical Meeting of the Institute of Navigation, Abstract, Jan. 26-28, 2000. |
Blanch, Juan , et al., “RAIM with Optimal Integrity and Continuity Allocations Under Multiple Failures”, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, vol. 46, No. 3, Jul. 2010. |
Brack, A. , “Optimal Estimation of a Subset of Integers With Application to GNSS”, Artificial Satellites, vol. 51, No. 4—2016 DOI: 10.1515/arsa-2016-0011. |
Brocard, Philippe , “Integrity monitoring for mobile users in urban environment”, https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/el-01379632/document, submitted Oct. 11, 2016. |
Bruno, Jon , et al., “A realistic simulation framework to evaluate ionospheric tomography”, Advances in Space Research 65 (2020) 891-901. |
Cassel, Ryan , “Real-Time ARAIM Using GPS, GLONASS, and GALILEO”, Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering in the Graduate College of the Illinois Institute of Technology, May 2017. |
Chiu, David S. , et al., “Bierman-Thornton UD Filtering for Double-Differenced Carrier Phase Estimation Accounting for Full Mathematical Correlation”, Jan. 2008, ION NTM 2008, pp. 756-762., Jun. 23, 2017 00:00:00.0. |
Davidson, Pavel , et al., “Improved Vehicle Positioning in Urban Environment through Integration of GPS and Low-Cost Inertial Sensors”, European Navigation Conference, ENC-GNSSAt: Naples, Italy, May 2009. |
Drescher, Ralf , “Fast convergence of Trimble CenterPoint RTX by regional augmentation”, Trimble Terrasat GmbJ, Munich, EGU General Assembly 2015, Vienna, Thursday, Apr. 16, 2015. |
Favey, Etienne , et al., “Dead reckoning fills-in GPS navigation gap”, EE Times, Automotive Designline, Aug. 18, 2011. |
Feng, Shaun , et al., “Carrier phase-based integrity monitoring for high-accuracy positioning”, GPS Solution, Apr. 2009. |
Gratton, Livio , et al., “Carrier Phase Relative RAIM Algorithms and Protection Level Derivation”, Journal of Navigation (2010), 63, 215-231, doi: 10.1017/S0373463309990403. |
Gunning, Kazuma , et al., “Design and evaluation of integrity algorithms for PPP in kinematic applications”, Proceedings of the 31st International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of The Institute of Navigation (ION GNSS+ 2018) Sep. 24-28, 2018, Hyatt Regency Miami, Miami, Florida. |
Henkel, Patrick , et al., “Joint L-/C-Band Code and Carrier Phase Linear Combinations for Galileo”, International Journal of Navigation and Observation, vol. 2008, Article ID 651437, 8 pages. |
Hirokawa, Dr. Rui , “Recent Activity of International Standardization for High-Accuracy GNSS Correction Service”, Mitsubishi Electric, Jun. 27, 2019. |
Huang, Panpan , “Airborne GNSS PPP Based Pseudolite System”, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering Faculty of Engineering UNSW. Jun. 2019. |
Karaim, Malek , et al., “GNSS Error Sources”, https://www.intechopen.com/books/multifunctional-operation-and-application-of-gps/gnss-error-sources, published Apr. 6, 2018. |
Khanafseh, Samer , et al., “GNSS Multipath Error Modeling for Automotive Applications”, Abstract only, Proceedings of the 31st International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of The Institute of Navigation (ION GNSS+ 2018), Miami, Florida, Sep. 2018, pp. 1573-1589, https://www.ion.org/publications/abstract.cfm?articleID=16107. |
Kilic, Cagri , et al., “ZUPT Aided GNSS Factor Graph with Inertial Navigation Integration for Wheeled Robots”, Proceedings of the 34th International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of The Institute of Navigation (ION GNSS+ 2021) Sep. 20-24, 2021. |
Kissai, Ali , et al., “UAV Dead Reckoning with and without using INS/ GPS Integrated System in GPS denied Polar Region”, International Journal of Aeronautics and Aerospace Engineering, ISSN: 2643-8224, 10 pages, published Aug. 26, 2019. |
Ko, Jonathan , et al., “GP-UKF: Unscented kalman filters with Gaussian process prediction and observation models”, Conference Paper, Dec. 2007, 10.1109/IROS.2007.4399284. |
Kuusniemi, Heidi , et al., “GNSS Signal Reliability Testing in Urban and Indoor Environments”, Proceedings of NTM 2004 Conference (Session A2), San Diego, CA, Jan. 26-28, 2004, The Institute of Navigation. |
Lee, Jae Ho , et al., “A Two-antenna GPS Receiver Integrated with Dead Reckoning Sensors”, ION Institute of Navigation, Proceedings of the IAIN Work Congress and the 56th Annual Meeting of the Institute of Navigation, Jun. 26-28, 2000, 4 pages. |
Lei, Yu , et al., “Prediction of Navigation Satellite Clock Bias by Gaussian Process Regression”, Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering 342:411-423, Jan. 2015. |
Li, T. , et al., “Some remarks on GNSS integer ambiguity validation methods”, Survey Review, Dec. 5, 2012, vol. 44, No. 326. |
Lim, Cheol-Soon , et al., “Feasibility Study on Integration of SSR Correction into Network RTK to Provide More Robust Service”, JPNT 7(4), 295-305 (2018). |
Lin, Ming , et al., “Robust Gaussian Process Regression for Real-Time High Precision GPS Signal Enhancement”, www.gps.gov/systems/gps/performance/accuracy, Jun. 5, 2019. |
Liu, Haiying , et al., “A closed-loop EKF and multi-failure diagnosis approach for cooperative GNSS positioning”, Engineering, GPS Solutions, Published 2015. |
Madrid, Navarro , et al., “New Approach for Integrity Bounds Computation Applied to Advanced Precise Positioning Applications”, Proceedings of the 28th International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of The Institute of Navigation (ION GNSS+ 2015) Sep. 14-18, 2015, Tampa Convention Center, Tampa, Florida. |
Meng, Xiaoli , et al., “A Robust Vehicle Localization Approach Based on GNSS/IMU/DMI/LiDAR Sensor Fusion for Autonomous Vehicles”, Sensors, 2017, 17, 2140. |
Odijk, Dennis , et al., “On the estimability of parameters in undifferenced, uncombined GNSS network and PPP-RTK user models by means of S-system theory”, Journal of Geodesy, Nov. 2015. |
Peng, Hao , et al., “Covariance Fusion Strategy of Gaussian Processes Covariance and Orbital Prediction Uncertainty”, Conference: AAS/AIAA Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, Portland, ME, Aug. 2019. |
Pervan, Boris , et al., “Shaping Aviation Integrity Two RAIMs for Safety”, GPS World The Business and Technology of Global Navigation and Positioning, Apr. 1, 2008. |
Phelts, R. Eric, et al., “Innovation: Improving ARAIM, An approach using precise point positioning”, GPS World, Jun. 13, 2020, https://www.gpsworld.com/innovation-improving-araim/. |
Pullen, Sam , “Augmented GNSS: Fundamentals and Keys to Integrity and Continuity”, Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-4035 USA, Tuesday, Sep. 20, 2011 1:30-5:00 PM Oregon Convention Center, Portland, Oregon. |
Rasmussen, C.E. , et al., “Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning”, MIT Press, 2006, ISBN 026218253X. c 2006 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, (Year: 2006). |
Rodriguez-Solano, Carlos , et al., “Protection Level of the Trimble RTX Positioning Engine for Autonomous Applications”, Proceedings of the 34th International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of The Institute of Navigation (ION GNSS+ 2021), Sep. 20-24, 2021. |
Rothacher, M. , et al., “ANTEX: The Antenna Exchange Format, Version 1.4”, Sep. 15, 2010, IGC International GNSS Service, https://kb.igs_org/hc/en-us/articles/216104678-ANTEX-format-description. |
Satirapod, Chalermehon , “Improving the GPS Data Processing Algorithm for Precise Static Relative Positioning”, School of Surveying and Spatial Information Systems The University of New South Wales. Jan. 2002. |
Schmid, R. , et al., “Estimation of elevation-dependent satellite antenna phase center variations of GPS satellites”, Journal of Geodesy (2003) 77: 440-446, May 19, 2003, DOI 10.1007/s00190-003-0339-0. |
Schmid, Ralf , et al., “From Relative Absolute Antenna Phase Center Corrections”, Conference: IGS Workshop and Symposium 2004. |
Schmid, Ralf , “How to Use IGS Antenna Phase Center Corrections”, GPS World Tech Talk, Feb. 3, 2010. |
Wang, Min , et al., “GPS Un-Differenced Ambiguity Resolution and Validation”, Proceedings of the 19th International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of The Institute of Navigation (ION GNSS 2006), p. 292-300 (Year: 2006). |
Kim, Donguk , et al., “Modified Kriging Based Double-Difference Tropospheric Correction Interpolation Method for Network RTK User”, Proceedings of the 30th International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of The Institute of Navigation (ION GNSS+ 2017), Sep. 25-29, 2017, Oregon Convention Center. Portland, Oregon. |
Li, Yihe , et al., “Improved PPP Ambiguity Resolution Considering the Stochastic Characteristics of Atmospheric Corrections from Regional Networks”, Sensors 2015, 15, 29893-29909; doi:10.3390/s151229772, www.mdpi.com/journal/sensors, published Nov. 30, 2025. |
Li, Xingxing , et al., “Real-time precise point positioning regional augmentation for large GPS reference networks”, GPS Solut (2014) 18:61-71, published Jan. 24, 2013. |
Sparks, Lawrence , et al., “Estimating ionospheric delay using kriging”, Radio Science, vol. 46, RS0D21, doi:10.1029/2011RS004667, 2011, published Oct. 27, 2011. |
Yang, Lei , et al., “Numerical weather modeling-based slant tropospheric delay estimation and its enhancement by GNSS data”, Geo-spatial Information Science, 2013, vol. 16, No. 3, 186-200, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10095020.2013.817107, published Aug. 13, 2013. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20230341560 A1 | Oct 2023 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62587741 | Nov 2017 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 17347874 | Jun 2021 | US |
Child | 18210455 | US | |
Parent | 16589932 | Oct 2019 | US |
Child | 17347874 | US | |
Parent | 16195427 | Nov 2018 | US |
Child | 16589932 | US |