pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.07412 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-08 · 💻 cs.LG · cs.AI

Tracking Large-scale Shared Bikes with Inertial Motion Learning in GNSS Blocked Environments

Feng Liu (1) , Kejia Li (1) , Zhiwei Yang (2) , Chunwei Yang (2) , Qun Li (2) , Guobin Wu (2) , Qiang Ni (3) , Ruipeng Gao (1) ((1) Beijing Jiaotong University
show 2 more authors
(2) DiDi Company (3) Lancaster University)
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-11 01:53 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.LG cs.AI
keywords inertial navigationshared bikesmixture of expertsGNSS denied environmentspedaling calibrationwheel speed estimationtrajectory trackingurban canyons
0
0 comments X

The pith

Bicycle mechanical constraints combined with mixture-of-experts learning allow accurate inertial tracking of shared bikes in GNSS-blocked areas.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper seeks to establish that low-cost inertial sensors, enhanced by bike-specific mechanical knowledge and a specialized neural architecture, can provide reliable position tracking for shared bikes even when satellite signals are unavailable. This would matter because current solutions either drift over time or require expensive additional hardware that cannot scale to city-wide bike fleets. By modeling how pedaling motions translate into wheel speeds through the bike's gears and using multiple expert networks to handle varying conditions, the system achieves dynamic calibration and uncertainty estimates. Real-world tests on DiDi platform data confirm meaningful gains over standard methods.

Core claim

By integrating the intrinsic relationship between a rider's periodic pedaling behaviors and acceleration variations—derived from the mechanical transmission between pedal and rear wheel—with a mixture-of-experts model that captures shared representations and uses a gating mechanism for weighting, the framework enables uncertainty-aware trajectory estimation and dynamic wheel speed calibration, leading to at least 12% accuracy improvement over baselines with wheel speed errors below 0.5 m/s at the 95th percentile in real-world riding data.

What carries the argument

Mixture-of-experts model with gating mechanism, integrated with pedaling-acceleration to wheel-speed mapping from bicycle mechanical transmission for dynamic calibration.

If this is right

  • Supports deployment of tracking systems on large shared bike fleets using only inexpensive inertial sensors.
  • Reduces reliance on visual or LiDAR sensors that are impractical for mass deployment.
  • Provides uncertainty-aware estimates that can improve overall trajectory reliability in urban environments.
  • Offers a way to mitigate cumulative drifts typical in pure inertial navigation through periodic mechanical calibration.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Similar pedaling-based calibration could apply to other human-powered vehicles with comparable drive systems.
  • The approach might reduce the need for frequent GPS fixes, conserving energy in battery-powered trackers.
  • Accurate tracking without satellites could enable better fleet management and theft recovery in dense cities.

Load-bearing premise

That the periodic pedaling-acceleration patterns can be reliably mapped to wheel speed via the bike's mechanical transmission across diverse riders, bikes, and road conditions without the model overfitting to specific training data.

What would settle it

Collecting new riding data from riders with significantly different pedaling styles or bikes with altered gear ratios and checking if the 95th-percentile wheel speed error exceeds 0.5 m/s or the accuracy gain falls below 12%.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.07412 by (2) DiDi Company, (3) Lancaster University), Chunwei Yang (2), Feng Liu (1), Guobin Wu (2), Kejia Li (1), Qiang Ni (3), Qun Li (2), Ruipeng Gao (1) ((1) Beijing Jiaotong University, Zhiwei Yang (2).

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Satellite signals may be blocked or even unavailable in many bike [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Overview of the proposed inertial tracking framework for shared [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Model architecture comparison between the conventional multi-head [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Illustration of task-specific gating and top-2 expert fusion in MTIM [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Overall architecture of the MTIMNet. An encoder extracts features [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Demonstration of the pedal action and one-way clutch mechanism. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Calculation process of pedalling cycles. From top to bottom: forward [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The MWI and autocorrelation sequences of forward accelerations in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Top view of the Customized Dataset collection area. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: ATE and AYE for different methods on the Customized Dataset. The MTIMNet model outperforms baselines on both test-seen and test-unseen sets. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Example trajectories produced by different models. Results from the MTIMNet model are closer to the ground truth. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Comparison of MTIMNet with the best baseline in terms of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Task-expert analysis of the proposed MTIMNet. (a) Average gating [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Performance comparison of MTIMNet with different model structures [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Performance of pseudo wheel speed estimation under different riding [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_17.png] view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Comparison of pseudo wheel speed estimation with RTK velocity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_18.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Although Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) provide a general solution for bike tracking outdoors, there still exist complex riding environments where only inertial navigation systems work, such as urban canyons. Despite decades of research, localization using only low-cost inertial sensors still faces challenges such as cumulative drifts and poor robustness caused by filtering methods. Furthermore, sensors such as visual and LiDAR could provide reliable measurements, but they are not suitable for large-scale deployment. In this paper, we propose an inertial tracking framework that integrates bicycle mechanical constraints with a mixture-of-experts model. Specifically, we leverage multiple expert modules to capture shared representations and weight them through the gating mechanism, thus improving multi-task learning performance and enabling uncertainty-aware trajectory estimation. Furthermore, based on the mechanical transmission between the pedal and the rear wheel of a bike, we explore the intrinsic relationship between the rider's periodic pedalling behaviors and acceleration variations, and convert such patterns into bike's wheel speed for dynamic calibration. Experiments with real-world riding data from shared bikes of the DiDi ride-hailing platform demonstrate that our system improves the accuracy of baselines by at least 12%, with wheel speed errors below 0.5 m/s at 95-percentile.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes an inertial tracking framework for shared bikes in GNSS-blocked environments (e.g., urban canyons) that fuses bicycle mechanical constraints—specifically, converting periodic pedaling-acceleration patterns into wheel speed via the assumed fixed pedal-to-rear-wheel transmission ratio—with a mixture-of-experts (MoE) model using a gating mechanism for multi-task learning and uncertainty-aware trajectory estimation. On real-world DiDi ride-hailing data, it claims at least 12% accuracy improvement over baselines and 95th-percentile wheel-speed error below 0.5 m/s.

Significance. If the performance claims and generalization hold after proper validation, the work could enable scalable, hardware-light bike localization for urban mobility platforms by leveraging existing mechanical properties instead of vision or LiDAR sensors. The integration of domain-specific constraints into an MoE architecture is a constructive approach to reducing inertial drift, though the absence of ablations and diversity analysis limits assessment of its broader impact.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The central performance claims (≥12% accuracy gain and wheel-speed error <0.5 m/s at 95th percentile) are reported without any description of model architecture details, training protocol, validation splits, number of rides/riders, baseline implementations, error bars, or ablation studies. This absence is load-bearing because the soundness of the quantitative results cannot be verified from the provided text.
  2. [Method (dynamic calibration)] Dynamic calibration component: The mapping from pedaling-acceleration patterns to wheel speed rests on the assumption of a constant, known mechanical transmission ratio and that acceleration variations are dominated by pedaling (rather than road bumps, braking, or coasting). No stratification, ablation, or cross-bike/rider/surface testing is described to support generalization, which directly underpins the dynamic calibration and overall accuracy claims.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Method] Clarify the precise mathematical formulation of the MoE gating network and how uncertainty is propagated into the final trajectory estimate.
  2. [Experiments] Add a table or figure summarizing dataset statistics (number of rides, total distance, rider/bike diversity) to support the generalization claims.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback and positive view of the work's potential impact. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly to improve clarity and provide additional supporting analyses.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The central performance claims (≥12% accuracy gain and wheel-speed error <0.5 m/s at 95th percentile) are reported without any description of model architecture details, training protocol, validation splits, number of rides/riders, baseline implementations, error bars, or ablation studies. This absence is load-bearing because the soundness of the quantitative results cannot be verified from the provided text.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract, constrained by length, omits these specifics. The full manuscript details the mixture-of-experts architecture and gating mechanism in the Methods section, the training protocol and data splits in the Experiments section, baseline implementations with quantitative comparisons, and reports performance with error metrics. We will revise the abstract to concisely reference the real-world DiDi dataset scale, key methodological components, and presence of supporting analyses while adhering to length limits. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Method (dynamic calibration)] Dynamic calibration component: The mapping from pedaling-acceleration patterns to wheel speed rests on the assumption of a constant, known mechanical transmission ratio and that acceleration variations are dominated by pedaling (rather than road bumps, braking, or coasting). No stratification, ablation, or cross-bike/rider/surface testing is described to support generalization, which directly underpins the dynamic calibration and overall accuracy claims.

    Authors: The fixed transmission ratio assumption follows from the uniform mechanical design of the DiDi shared-bike fleet. We acknowledge the lack of explicit stratification and cross-condition testing in the current version. In the revision we will add an ablation study that stratifies results across rider groups, surface types, and riding conditions (e.g., braking vs. steady pedaling) and include a sensitivity analysis on the transmission-ratio assumption to better substantiate generalization. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in the derivation chain

full rationale

The paper's framework derives wheel speed from periodic pedaling patterns via the bike's mechanical transmission ratio, an independent physical constraint rather than a quantity defined in terms of the output or fitted by construction. The mixture-of-experts model learns representations for multi-task trajectory estimation from real-world DiDi riding data, which constitutes standard supervised learning without the predictions reducing to inputs by definition. No self-citation load-bearing steps, uniqueness theorems imported from authors, or ansatzes smuggled via citation appear in the provided text. The reported accuracy gains rest on empirical evaluation against baselines on external real-world rides, rendering the derivation self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The framework rests on standard inertial-navigation assumptions plus learned model parameters; no new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (2)
  • Mixture-of-experts and gating parameters
    Weights of expert networks and gating mechanism are fitted during training on ride data.
  • Pedaling-to-wheel-speed mapping coefficients
    Scaling or conversion factors derived from observed acceleration patterns.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Bicycle mechanical transmission between pedal and rear wheel produces repeatable acceleration patterns usable for wheel-speed estimation
    Invoked to justify dynamic calibration from pedaling behavior.
  • domain assumption Low-cost inertial sensors provide sufficient signal for learned fusion to mitigate cumulative drift
    Core premise of the inertial tracking framework.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5572 in / 1326 out tokens · 53381 ms · 2026-05-11T01:53:28.741737+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A new approach to linear filtering and prediction problems,

    R. E. Kalman, “A new approach to linear filtering and prediction problems,”Journal of Fluids Engineering, 1960. JOURNAL OF LATEX CLASS FILES, VOL. 14, NO. 8, AUGUST 2021 13

    work page 1960

  2. [2]

    Gltc: A metro passenger identification method across afc data and sparse wifi data,

    J. Zhao, L. Zhang, K. Ye, J. Ye, J. Zhang, F. Zhang, and C. Xu, “Gltc: A metro passenger identification method across afc data and sparse wifi data,”IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 23, no. 10, pp. 18 337–18 351, 2022

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    Accurate indoor localization for bluetooth low energy backscatter,

    Z. Luo, W. Li, Y . Wu, H. Dong, L. Bian, and W. Wang, “Accurate indoor localization for bluetooth low energy backscatter,”IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 1805–1816, 2025

    work page 2025

  4. [4]

    Tightly coupled integration of gnss/uwb/vio for reliable and seamless positioning,

    T. Liu, B. Li, G. Chen, L. Yang, J. Qiao, and W. Chen, “Tightly coupled integration of gnss/uwb/vio for reliable and seamless positioning,”IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 2116–2128, 2024

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Ionet: Learning to cure the curse of drift in inertial odometry,

    C. Chen, X. Lu, A. Markham, and N. Trigoni, “Ionet: Learning to cure the curse of drift in inertial odometry,”Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 32, no. 1, Apr. 2018. [Online]. Available: https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/AAAI/article/view/12102

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    Ronin: Robust neural inertial navigation in the wild: Benchmark, evaluations, & new methods,

    S. Herath, H. Yan, and Y . Furukawa, “Ronin: Robust neural inertial navigation in the wild: Benchmark, evaluations, & new methods,” in2020 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2020, pp. 3146–3152

    work page 2020

  7. [7]

    Llio: Lightweight learned inertial odometer,

    Y . Wang, J. Kuang, X. Niu, and J. Liu, “Llio: Lightweight learned inertial odometer,”IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 2508– 2518, 2022

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    Pedestrian inertial positioning method based on foot quasi-zero velocity observation under multiple motion modes,

    P. Zhang, Z. Deng, Z. Meng, H. Li, J. Wang, and L. Wang, “Pedestrian inertial positioning method based on foot quasi-zero velocity observation under multiple motion modes,”IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 10, no. 20, pp. 18 438–18 447, 2023

    work page 2023

  9. [9]

    Integrated inertial- lidar-based map matching localization for varying environments,

    X. Xia, N. P. Bhatt, A. Khajepour, and E. Hashemi, “Integrated inertial- lidar-based map matching localization for varying environments,”IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, vol. 8, no. 10, pp. 4307–4318, 2023

    work page 2023

  10. [10]

    Changes in muscle coordination and power output during sprint cycling,

    S. J. O’Bryan, N. A. Brown, F. Billaut, and D. M. Rouffet, “Changes in muscle coordination and power output during sprint cycling,” Neuroscience Letters, vol. 576, pp. 11–16, 2014. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304394014003954

    work page 2014

  11. [11]

    Deep learning for inertial positioning: A survey,

    C. Chen and X. Pan, “Deep learning for inertial positioning: A survey,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2024

    work page 2024

  12. [12]

    Improving inertial sensor by reducing errors using deep learning methodology,

    H. Chen, P. Aggarwal, T. M. Taha, and V . P. Chodavarapu, “Improving inertial sensor by reducing errors using deep learning methodology,” in NAECON 2018-IEEE National Aerospace and Electronics Conference. IEEE, 2018, pp. 197–202

    work page 2018

  13. [13]

    Calib-net: Calibrating the low-cost imu via deep convolutional neural network,

    R. Li, C. Fu, W. Yi, and X. Yi, “Calib-net: Calibrating the low-cost imu via deep convolutional neural network,”Frontiers in Robotics and AI, vol. 8, p. 772583, 2022

    work page 2022

  14. [14]

    Learning to calibrate: Reinforcement learning for guided calibration of visual–inertial rigs,

    F. Nobre and C. Heckman, “Learning to calibrate: Reinforcement learning for guided calibration of visual–inertial rigs,”The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 38, no. 12-13, pp. 1388–1402, 2019

    work page 2019

  15. [15]

    Denoising imu gyroscopes with deep learning for open-loop attitude estimation,

    M. Brossard, S. Bonnabel, and A. Barrau, “Denoising imu gyroscopes with deep learning for open-loop attitude estimation,”IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 4796–4803, 2020

    work page 2020

  16. [16]

    A mems imu gyroscope calibration method based on deep learning,

    F. Huang, Z. Wang, L. Xing, and C. Gao, “A mems imu gyroscope calibration method based on deep learning,”IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 71, pp. 1–9, 2022

    work page 2022

  17. [17]

    Airimu: Learning uncertainty propagation for inertial odometry,

    Y . Qiu, C. Wang, C. Xu, Y . Chen, X. Zhou, Y . Xia, and S. Scherer, “Airimu: Learning uncertainty propagation for inertial odometry,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.04874

    work page arXiv 2024

  18. [18]

    Ridi: Robust imu double integra- tion,

    H. Yan, Q. Shan, and Y . Furukawa, “Ridi: Robust imu double integra- tion,” inProceedings of the European conference on computer vision (ECCV), 2018, pp. 621–636

    work page 2018

  19. [19]

    Deep learning based speed esti- mation for constraining strapdown inertial navigation on smartphones,

    S. Cort ´es, A. Solin, and J. Kannala, “Deep learning based speed esti- mation for constraining strapdown inertial navigation on smartphones,” in2018 IEEE 28th International Workshop on Machine Learning for Signal Processing (MLSP). IEEE, 2018, pp. 1–6

    work page 2018

  20. [20]

    Deepvip: Deep learning-based vehicle indoor positioning using smartphones,

    B. Zhou, Z. Gu, F. Gu, P. Wu, C. Yang, X. Liu, L. Li, Y . Li, and Q. Li, “Deepvip: Deep learning-based vehicle indoor positioning using smartphones,”IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 71, no. 12, pp. 13 299–13 309, 2022

    work page 2022

  21. [21]

    Neural inertial localization,

    S. Herath, D. Caruso, C. Liu, Y . Chen, and Y . Furukawa, “Neural inertial localization,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2022, pp. 6604–6613

    work page 2022

  22. [22]

    Idol: Inertial deep orientation- estimation and localization,

    S. Sun, D. Melamed, and K. Kitani, “Idol: Inertial deep orientation- estimation and localization,” inProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 35, no. 7, 2021, pp. 6128–6137

    work page 2021

  23. [23]

    Ctin: Robust contextual transformer network for inertial navigation,

    B. Rao, E. Kazemi, Y . Ding, D. M. Shila, F. M. Tucker, and L. Wang, “Ctin: Robust contextual transformer network for inertial navigation,” in Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 36, no. 5, 2022, pp. 5413–5421

    work page 2022

  24. [24]

    EqNIO: Subequivariant neural inertial odometry,

    R. K. Jayanth*, Y . Xu*, Z. Wang, E. Chatzipantazis, K. Daniilidis, and D. Gehrig, “EqNIO: Subequivariant neural inertial odometry,” inThe Thirteenth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://openreview.net/forum?id=C8jXEugWkq

    work page 2025

  25. [25]

    Tartan imu: A light foundation model for inertial positioning in robotics,

    S. Zhao, S. Zhou, R. Blanchard, Y . Qiu, W. Wang, and S. Scherer, “Tartan imu: A light foundation model for inertial positioning in robotics,” in2025 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2025, pp. 22 520–22 529

    work page 2025

  26. [26]

    Tlio: Tight learned inertial odometry,

    W. Liu, D. Caruso, E. Ilg, J. Dong, A. I. Mourikis, K. Daniilidis, V . Kumar, and J. Engel, “Tlio: Tight learned inertial odometry,”IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 5653–5660, 2020

    work page 2020

  27. [27]

    Imunet: Efficient regression architecture for inertial imu navigation and positioning,

    B. Zeinali, H. Zanddizari, and M. J. Chang, “Imunet: Efficient regression architecture for inertial imu navigation and positioning,”IEEE Transac- tions on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 73, pp. 1–13, 2024

    work page 2024

  28. [28]

    Airio: Learning inertial odometry with enhanced imu feature observability,

    Y . Qiu, C. Xu, Y . Chen, S. Zhao, J. Geng, and S. Scherer, “Airio: Learning inertial odometry with enhanced imu feature observability,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 10, no. 9, pp. 9368–9375, 2025

    work page 2025

  29. [29]

    Learned inertial odometry for autonomous drone racing,

    G. Cioffi, L. Bauersfeld, E. Kaufmann, and D. Scaramuzza, “Learned inertial odometry for autonomous drone racing,”IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 2684–2691, 2023

    work page 2023

  30. [30]

    Indoor drone localization and tracking based on acoustic inertial measurement,

    Y . Sun, W. Wang, L. Mottola, J. Zhang, R. Wang, and Y . He, “Indoor drone localization and tracking based on acoustic inertial measurement,” IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 7537–7551, 2024

    work page 2024

  31. [31]

    Heteroge- neous multi-task learning for multiple pseudo-measurement estimation to bridge gps outages,

    S. Lu, Y . Gong, H. Luo, F. Zhao, Z. Li, and J. Jiang, “Heteroge- neous multi-task learning for multiple pseudo-measurement estimation to bridge gps outages,”IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 70, pp. 1–16, 2020

    work page 2020

  32. [32]

    Metroloc: Metro vehicle mapping and localization with lidar-camera-inertial integration,

    Y . Wang, W. Song, Y . Wang, X. Dai, and Y . Lou, “Metroloc: Metro vehicle mapping and localization with lidar-camera-inertial integration,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 1441–1453, 2025

    work page 2025

  33. [33]

    Rvio: An effective localiza- tion algorithm for range-aided visual-inertial odometry system,

    J. Wang, P. Gu, L. Wang, and Z. Meng, “Rvio: An effective localiza- tion algorithm for range-aided visual-inertial odometry system,”IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 1476–1490, 2024

    work page 2024

  34. [34]

    Visual- inertial-acoustic sensor fusion for accurate autonomous localization of underwater vehicles,

    Y . Huang, P. Li, S. Ma, S. Yan, M. Tan, J. Yu, and Z. Wu, “Visual- inertial-acoustic sensor fusion for accurate autonomous localization of underwater vehicles,”IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, 2024

    work page 2024

  35. [35]

    Toward persistent spatial awareness: A review of pedestrian dead reckoning-centric indoor positioning with smartphones,

    S. Bai, W. Wen, Y . Li, C. Shi, and L.-T. Hsu, “Toward persistent spatial awareness: A review of pedestrian dead reckoning-centric indoor positioning with smartphones,”IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 73, pp. 1–28, 2024

    work page 2024

  36. [36]

    Step length is a more reliable measurement than walking speed for pedestrian dead-reckoning*,

    F. Elyasi and R. Manduchi, “Step length is a more reliable measurement than walking speed for pedestrian dead-reckoning*,” in2023 13th International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), 2023, pp. 1–6

    work page 2023

  37. [37]

    Threshold-free phase segmentation and zero velocity detection for gait analysis using foot-mounted inertial sensors,

    X. Shi, Z. Wang, H. Zhao, S. Qiu, R. Liu, F. Lin, and K. Tang, “Threshold-free phase segmentation and zero velocity detection for gait analysis using foot-mounted inertial sensors,”IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 176–186, 2023

    work page 2023

  38. [38]

    An adaptive robust ekf based on mahalanobis distance and non-holonomic constraints for enhancing vehicle position- ing accuracy,

    X. Zhang and J. Yang, “An adaptive robust ekf based on mahalanobis distance and non-holonomic constraints for enhancing vehicle position- ing accuracy,”IEEE Sensors Journal, 2024

    work page 2024

  39. [39]

    Deep neural network based inertial odometry using low-cost inertial measurement units,

    C. Chen, C. X. Lu, J. Wahlstr ¨om, A. Markham, and N. Trigoni, “Deep neural network based inertial odometry using low-cost inertial measurement units,”IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 1351–1364, 2019

    work page 2019

  40. [40]

    Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining , series =

    J. Ma, Z. Zhao, X. Yi, J. Chen, L. Hong, and E. H. Chi, “Modeling task relationships in multi-task learning with multi-gate mixture-of-experts,” inProceedings of the 24th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining, ser. KDD ’18. New York, NY , USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2018, p. 1930–1939. [Online]. Available: ...

    work page doi:10.1145/3219819.3220007 2018

  41. [41]

    What uncertainties do we need in bayesian deep learning for computer vision?

    A. Kendall and Y . Gal, “What uncertainties do we need in bayesian deep learning for computer vision?” inProceedings of the 31st International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, ser. NIPS’17. Red Hook, NY , USA: Curran Associates Inc., 2017, p. 5580–5590

    work page 2017

  42. [42]

    On the theory of filter amplifiers,

    S. Butterworthet al., “On the theory of filter amplifiers,”Wireless Engineer, vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 536–541, 1930

    work page 1930

  43. [43]

    Automatic step detection in the accelerometer signal,

    H. Ying, C. Silex, A. Schnitzer, S. Leonhardt, and M. Schiek, “Automatic step detection in the accelerometer signal,” in4th International Work- shop on Wearable and Implantable Body Sensor Networks (BSN 2007) March 26–28, 2007 RWTH Aachen University, Germany. Springer, 2007, pp. 80–85

    work page 2007

  44. [44]

    G. E. Box, G. M. Jenkins, G. C. Reinsel, and G. M. Ljung,Time series analysis: forecasting and control. John Wiley & Sons, 2015. JOURNAL OF LATEX CLASS FILES, VOL. 14, NO. 8, AUGUST 2021 14

    work page 2015

  45. [45]

    Gupta, and Dezhi Hong

    S. Li, R. R. Chowdhury, J. Shang, R. K. Gupta, and D. Hong, “Units: Short-time fourier inspired neural networks for sensory time series classification,” inProceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems, ser. SenSys ’21. New York, NY , USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2021, p. 234–247. [Online]. Available: https://doi....

    work page doi:10.1145/3485730.3485942 2021

  46. [46]

    Smartphone-based pedestrian inertial tracking: Dataset, model, and deployment,

    F. Liu, H. Ge, D. Tao, R. Gao, and Z. Zhang, “Smartphone-based pedestrian inertial tracking: Dataset, model, and deployment,”IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 73, pp. 1–13, 2024

    work page 2024

  47. [47]

    A benchmark for the evaluation of rgb-d slam systems,

    J. Sturm, N. Engelhard, F. Endres, W. Burgard, and D. Cremers, “A benchmark for the evaluation of rgb-d slam systems,” in2012 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2012, pp. 573–580. Feng Liureceived the B.S. degree from the Inner Mongolia University of Technology, Inner Mongolia, China, in 2022. He is currently working towa...

    work page 2012