Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Benchmarking ground truth trajectories with robotic total stations

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2309.05134 v2 pith:JSTZ5MP3 submitted 2023-09-10 cs.RO

classification cs.RO
keywords groundgnssalgorithmsmedianprecisionreproducibleresultssetups
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Benchmarks stand as vital cornerstones in elevating SLAM algorithms within mobile robotics. Consequently, ensuring accurate and reproducible ground truth generation is vital for fair evaluation. A majority of outdoor ground truths are generated by GNSS, which can lead to discrepancies over time, especially in covered areas. However, research showed that RTS setups are more precise and can alternatively be used to generate these ground truths. In our work, we compare both RTS and GNSS systems' precision and repeatability through a set of experiments conducted weeks and months apart in the same area. We demonstrated that RTS setups give more reproducible results, with disparities having a median value of 8.6 mm compared to a median value of 10.6 cm coming from a GNSS setup. These results highlight that RTS can be considered to benchmark process for SLAM algorithms with higher precision.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Boxi: Design Decisions in the Context of Algorithmic Performance for Robotics

    cs.RO 2025-04 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Using a 7.1 kg robot sensor payload and seven real-world environments, the study quantifies how time offsets, extrinsic calibration errors, IMU grade, and camera and LiDAR choice affect odometry accuracy.

Pith tools