pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.14353 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-15 · 💻 cs.RO

RoSLAC: Robust Simultaneous Localization and Calibration of Multiple Magnetometers

Qiyang Lyu , Zhenyu Wu , Wei Wang , Hongming Shen , Danwei Wang This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 12:42 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.RO
keywords magnetometer calibrationsimultaneous localization and calibrationambient magnetic fieldautonomous mobile robotsindoor localizationalternating optimizationsensor distortion
0
0 comments X

The pith

RoSLAC jointly estimates robot pose and magnetometer distortions through alternating optimization to enable accurate indoor localization without external references.

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

Autonomous mobile robots need reliable positioning in GPS-denied spaces like offices and parking garages. Ambient magnetic fields can provide this but onboard magnetometers suffer distortions from the robot's ferromagnetic parts. The paper presents RoSLAC as an alternating optimization routine that iteratively refines both the platform's pose and the calibration parameters from the same sensor stream. This removes the need for manual rotations or added infrastructure. Tests in high-fidelity simulation and real environments report high localization accuracy at lower computational cost than prior calibration methods.

Core claim

The paper claims that alternating optimization on measurements from multiple magnetometers in a stable ambient magnetic field can simultaneously recover the robot's pose and the distortion parameters of each sensor, yielding robust localization for autonomous mobile robots without external references or platform rotations.

What carries the argument

Alternating optimization that switches between pose estimation and calibration parameter updates using multiple magnetometer readings.

If this is right

  • Calibration becomes practical for large or heavy platforms where manual rotation is infeasible.
  • Localization remains accurate in enclosed environments where geometric features are sparse or occluded.
  • Computational requirements stay low relative to existing magnetometer calibration techniques.
  • Multiple onboard magnetometers can be handled together without separate calibration steps.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same joint-estimation pattern could extend to other platform-mounted sensors whose outputs are altered by vehicle materials.
  • In environments with weak magnetic variation the method would need an added check for field richness before trusting the estimates.
  • Combining the calibrated magnetic data with occasional LiDAR or vision updates might reduce drift in long corridors.

Load-bearing premise

The ambient magnetic field must be sufficiently rich, stable, and informative for the alternating optimization to converge on accurate joint estimates of pose and calibration without external references.

What would settle it

Deploy the method in a region of nearly uniform magnetic field and check whether the estimated poses become inconsistent with ground truth or the recovered calibration parameters fail to remove observed distortions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.14353 by Danwei Wang, Hongming Shen, Qiyang Lyu, Wei Wang, Zhenyu Wu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The measured values of a magnetic sensor can be influenced by two [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Flowchart of the proposed method. The overall pipeline can be decomposed into two sub-modules: (a) ambient magnetic map pre-building, and (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Five different experimental environments. Environments (1)–(4) correspond to real-world scenarios, while (5) represents a simulated warehouse [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The Scout Mini AMR is employed in both real-world and simulated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Visualization of the convergence of the magnetometer calibration [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Localization stability in different scenarios. Performance is compared with LiDAR-based relocalization [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Effect of the sequence accumulation length on the mean per-frame processing time of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Localization of autonomous mobile robots (AMRs) in enclosed or semi-enclosed environments such as offices, hotels, hospitals, indoor parking facilities, and underground spaces where GPS signals are weak or unavailable remains a major obstacle to the deployment of fully autonomous systems. Infrastructure-based localization approaches, such as QR codes and RFID, are constrained by high installation and maintenance costs as well as limited flexibility, while onboard sensor-based methods, including LiDAR- and vision-based solutions, are affected by ambiguous geometric features and frequent occlusions caused by dynamic obstacles such as pedestrians. Ambient magnetic field (AMF)-based localization has therefore attracted growing interest in recent years because it does not rely on external infrastructure or geometric features, making it well-suited for AMR applications such as service robots and security robots. However, magnetometer measurements are often corrupted by distortions caused by ferromagnetic materials present on the sensor platform, which bias the AMF and degrade localization reliability. As a result, accurate magnetometer calibration to estimate distortion parameters becomes essential. Conventional calibration methods that rely on rotating the magnetometer are impractical for large and heavy platforms. To address this limitation, this paper proposes a robust simultaneous localization and calibration (RoSLAC) approach based on alternating optimization, which iteratively and efficiently estimates both the platform pose and magnetometer calibration parameters. Extensive evaluations conducted in high-fidelity simulation and real-world environments demonstrate that the proposed RoSLAC method achieves high localization accuracy while maintaining low computational cost compared with state-of-the-art magnetometer calibration techniques.

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 / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes RoSLAC, a robust simultaneous localization and calibration framework for multiple magnetometers mounted on autonomous mobile robots. It employs alternating optimization to iteratively recover platform pose and per-magnetometer affine distortion parameters directly from ambient magnetic field measurements, without external references or manual rotations. The method is evaluated in high-fidelity simulation and real-world indoor environments, with the abstract asserting higher localization accuracy and lower computational cost relative to state-of-the-art magnetometer calibration techniques.

Significance. If the empirical claims hold under rigorous testing, the work would provide a practical, infrastructure-free solution for GPS-denied AMR localization in environments where vision and LiDAR struggle with occlusions. The alternating-optimization formulation is a clear technical contribution that could reduce calibration overhead on large platforms. However, the absence of quantitative metrics, baselines, and robustness checks in the reported evaluations limits the immediate impact and verifiability of the superiority claims.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the central claims of 'high localization accuracy' and 'low computational cost' are asserted without any numerical metrics, error bars, baseline comparisons, or statistical details, preventing assessment of whether the alternating optimization actually supports the stated improvements over SOTA methods.
  2. [Experimental evaluation] Experimental evaluation (implied by abstract claims): no sensitivity analysis, field-gradient statistics, or failure-case reporting is supplied to test convergence of the alternating optimizer when the ambient magnetic field is low-variation or near-uniform; this directly undermines the robustness claim because the joint pose-calibration problem becomes under-determined in such regimes.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract would be strengthened by including at least one key quantitative result (e.g., RMSE or runtime) to substantiate the accuracy and cost assertions.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed feedback. We address each major comment point by point below and outline the revisions we will make to improve the manuscript's clarity and verifiability.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claims of 'high localization accuracy' and 'low computational cost' are asserted without any numerical metrics, error bars, baseline comparisons, or statistical details, preventing assessment of whether the alternating optimization actually supports the stated improvements over SOTA methods.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract would benefit from explicit quantitative support for the claims. The full manuscript contains detailed numerical results, error statistics, and baseline comparisons in the experimental sections; however, these are summarized qualitatively in the abstract. In the revised manuscript, we will update the abstract to include specific metrics (e.g., mean localization error in cm, computation time per iteration, and direct comparisons to SOTA methods with standard deviations) to enable immediate assessment of the improvements. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Experimental evaluation] Experimental evaluation (implied by abstract claims): no sensitivity analysis, field-gradient statistics, or failure-case reporting is supplied to test convergence of the alternating optimizer when the ambient magnetic field is low-variation or near-uniform; this directly undermines the robustness claim because the joint pose-calibration problem becomes under-determined in such regimes.

    Authors: This observation correctly identifies a gap in the current robustness evaluation. Our reported experiments cover diverse indoor environments with varying magnetic field gradients, where the alternating optimizer converged consistently. To directly address the concern about low-variation or near-uniform fields, we will add a new sensitivity analysis subsection. This will include controlled tests with low-gradient fields, reporting of field-gradient statistics, convergence metrics, and failure cases, together with discussion of how the formulation mitigates under-determination. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity in derivation; method relies on external measurements and standard alternating optimization

full rationale

The paper presents RoSLAC as an iterative alternating optimization procedure that jointly estimates platform pose and per-magnetometer affine calibration parameters from ambient magnetic field measurements. No load-bearing step reduces by construction to its own inputs: the optimization is driven by external sensor data rather than self-defined quantities, no fitted parameters are relabeled as independent predictions, and no uniqueness theorems or ansatzes are imported via self-citation chains. The central claims rest on empirical evaluations in simulation and real environments, which are falsifiable outside the fitted values. This is the normal case of a self-contained algorithmic contribution without definitional circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based solely on the abstract, the central claim rests on the assumption that ambient magnetic fields provide enough information for joint pose and calibration estimation; no explicit free parameters or invented entities are detailed.

free parameters (1)
  • magnetometer distortion parameters
    Calibration parameters are estimated iteratively but no specific count or fitting procedure is described in the abstract.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Ambient magnetic field is stable and sufficiently varying to support pose estimation
    Invoked as the basis for AMF-based localization in GPS-denied settings.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5578 in / 1347 out tokens · 34993 ms · 2026-05-10T12:42:09.366210+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

39 extracted references · 39 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Mglt: Magnetic-lead global localization and tracking in degenerated repetitive environments,

    Z. Wu, W. Wang, J. Zhang, Y . Wang, G. Peng, and D. Wang, “Mglt: Magnetic-lead global localization and tracking in degenerated repetitive environments,”IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 4687–4698, 2024

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    Multi-sensor fusion and cooperative perception for autonomous driving: A review,

    C. Xiang, C. Feng, X. Xie, B. Shi, H. Lu, Y . Lv, M. Yang, and Z. Niu, “Multi-sensor fusion and cooperative perception for autonomous driving: A review,”IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Magazine, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 36–58, 2023

    work page 2023

  3. [3]

    Vins-mono: A robust and versatile monocular visual-inertial state estimator,

    T. Qin, P. Li, and S. Shen, “Vins-mono: A robust and versatile monocular visual-inertial state estimator,”IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 1004–1020, 2018

    work page 2018

  4. [4]

    Fast-lio2: Fast direct lidar-inertial odometry,

    W. Xu, Y . Cai, D. He, J. Lin, and F. Zhang, “Fast-lio2: Fast direct lidar-inertial odometry,”IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 2053–2073, 2022

    work page 2053

  5. [5]

    Real-time loop closure in 2d lidar slam,

    W. Hess, D. Kohler, H. Rapp, and D. Andor, “Real-time loop closure in 2d lidar slam,” in2016 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA), pp. 1271–1278, IEEE, 2016

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    Sensor- fusion based navigation for autonomous mobile robot,

    V . Usinskis, M. Nowicki, A. Dzedzickis, and V . Bu ˇcinskas, “Sensor- fusion based navigation for autonomous mobile robot,”Sensors, vol. 25, p. 1248, 02 2025

    work page 2025

  7. [7]

    Uwb indoor localization using deep learning lstm networks,

    A. Poulose and D. S. Han, “Uwb indoor localization using deep learning lstm networks,”Applied Sciences, vol. 10, no. 18, 2020

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    Outdoor mobile robot localization with factor graph and gnss uncertainty map,

    S. Cho, J. Lee, G. Park, and W. Chung, “Outdoor mobile robot localization with factor graph and gnss uncertainty map,” in2024 24th International Conference on Control, Automation and Systems (ICCAS), pp. 1593–1594, 2024

    work page 2024

  9. [9]

    Indoor localization of mobile robots through QR code detection and dead reckoning data fusion,

    P. Nazemzadehet al., “Indoor localization of mobile robots through QR code detection and dead reckoning data fusion,”IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics (TMECH), vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 2588–2599, 2017

    work page 2017

  10. [10]

    A novel path tracking controller for magnetic guided agvs,

    Z. Jiang, Y . Xu, and L. Sun, “A novel path tracking controller for magnetic guided agvs,” in2021 33rd Chinese Control and Decision Conference (CCDC), pp. 3292–3296, 2021

    work page 2021

  11. [11]

    Mobile robot localization in industrial environments using a ring of cameras and aruco markers,

    S. Roos-Hoefgeest, I. A. Garcia, and R. C. Gonzalez, “Mobile robot localization in industrial environments using a ring of cameras and aruco markers,” inProc. IECON 2021 - 47th Annu. Conf. of the IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc., pp. 1–6, IEEE, 2021

    work page 2021

  12. [12]

    Infrastructure- free global localization in repetitive environments: An overview,

    Z. Wu, M. Wen, G. Peng, X. Tang, and D. Wang, “Infrastructure- free global localization in repetitive environments: An overview,” in Proc. IECON 2020 - 46th Annu. Conf. of the IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc., pp. 626–631, IEEE, 2020

    work page 2020

  13. [13]

    Long-distance navigation and magnetoreception in mi- gratory animals,

    H. Mouritsen, “Long-distance navigation and magnetoreception in mi- gratory animals,”Nature, vol. 558, no. 7708, pp. 50–59, 2018. 11

    work page 2018

  14. [14]

    Scalable magnetic field slam in 3d using gaussian process maps,

    M. Kok and A. Solin, “Scalable magnetic field slam in 3d using gaussian process maps,” in2018 21st International Conference on Information Fusion (FUSION), pp. 1353–1360, 2018

    work page 2018

  15. [15]

    An extended kalman filter for magnetic field slam using gaussian process regression,

    F. Viset, R. Helmons, and M. Kok, “An extended kalman filter for magnetic field slam using gaussian process regression,”Sensors, vol. 22, no. 8, 2022

    work page 2022

  16. [16]

    IDF- MFL: Infrastructure-free and Drift-free Magnetic Field Localization for Mobile Robot,

    H. Shen, Z. Wu, W. Wang, Q. Lyu, H. Zhou, and D. Wang, “IDF- MFL: Infrastructure-free and Drift-free Magnetic Field Localization for Mobile Robot,” in2024 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pp. 2278–2285, IEEE, 2024

    work page 2024

  17. [17]

    How feasible is the use of magnetic field alone for indoor positioning?,

    B. Liet al., “How feasible is the use of magnetic field alone for indoor positioning?,” inProc. Int. Conf. Ind. Posi. Ind. Navi. (IPIN), pp. 1–9, IEEE, 2012

    work page 2012

  18. [18]

    Magnetic field-based indoor localization of a tracked robot with simultaneous cal- ibration,

    B. Siebler, T. Gerstewitz, S. Sand, and U. D. Hanebeck, “Magnetic field-based indoor localization of a tracked robot with simultaneous cal- ibration,” in2023 13th International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), pp. 1–6, 2023

    work page 2023

  19. [19]

    Crystal distortion in magnetic compounds,

    J. Kanamori, “Crystal distortion in magnetic compounds,”Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 31, no. 5, pp. S14–S23, 1960

    work page 1960

  20. [20]

    Simultaneous localization and mapping for pedestrians using distortions of the local magnetic field intensity in large indoor environments,

    P. Robertson, M. Frassl, M. Angermann, M. Doniec, B. J. Julian, M. Gar- cia Puyol, M. Khider, M. Lichtenstern, and L. Bruno, “Simultaneous localization and mapping for pedestrians using distortions of the local magnetic field intensity in large indoor environments,” inInternational Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation, pp. 1–10, 2013

    work page 2013

  21. [21]

    Pdr/geomagnetic fusion localization method based on aofa-improved particle filter,

    L.-F. Shi, M.-X. Yu, and W. Yin, “Pdr/geomagnetic fusion localization method based on aofa-improved particle filter,”IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 71, pp. 1–9, 2022

    work page 2022

  22. [22]

    Geometric approach to strapdown magnetometer calibration in sen- sor frame,

    J. F. Vasconcelos, G. Elkaim, C. Silvestre, P. Oliveira, and B. Cardeira, “Geometric approach to strapdown magnetometer calibration in sen- sor frame,”IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, vol. 47, pp. 1293–1306, Apr. 2011

    work page 2011

  23. [23]

    L2m-calib: One-key calibration method for lidar and multiple magnetic sensors,

    Q. Lyu, W. Wang, Z. Wu, H. Shen, H. Zhou, and D. Wang, “L2m-calib: One-key calibration method for lidar and multiple magnetic sensors,” 2025

    work page 2025

  24. [24]

    Correction method of three-axis magnetic sensor based on da– lm,

    L. Yang, C. Li, S. Zhang, C. Xu, H. Chen, S. Xiao, X. Tang, and Y . Li, “Correction method of three-axis magnetic sensor based on da– lm,”Metals, vol. 12, p. 428, Feb. 2022

    work page 2022

  25. [25]

    Compensation of aircraft magnetic fields,

    W. E. Tolles, “Compensation of aircraft magnetic fields,” Oct. 1954

    work page 1954

  26. [26]

    Calibration of triaxial magnetome- ter with ellipsoid fitting method,

    C. Chi, J.-W. Lv, and D. Wang, “Calibration of triaxial magnetome- ter with ellipsoid fitting method,”IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, vol. 237, p. 032015, Mar. 2019

    work page 2019

  27. [27]

    Magnetic field interference correction of high-precision geomagnetic directional technology,

    W. Chen, H. Zhang, S. Sang, M. Jiang, Y . Chen, and X. Liu, “Magnetic field interference correction of high-precision geomagnetic directional technology,”Measurement, vol. 184, p. 109940, Nov. 2021

    work page 2021

  28. [28]

    Compensation Technology of Vehicle Magnetometer Based on TTLS-Tikhonov Regularization,

    Z. Ning, P. Jiang, X. Pan, R. He, and W. Wu, “Compensation Technology of Vehicle Magnetometer Based on TTLS-Tikhonov Regularization,” IEEE Sensors Journal, vol. 24, pp. 36594–36603, Nov. 2024

    work page 2024

  29. [29]

    Extended kalman filter-based gyroscope-aided magnetometer calibration for consumer electronic de- vices,

    K. Han, H. Han, Z. Wang, and F. Xu, “Extended kalman filter-based gyroscope-aided magnetometer calibration for consumer electronic de- vices,”IEEE Sensors Journal, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 63–71, 2017

    work page 2017

  30. [30]

    Exponentially weighted particle filter for simultaneous localization and mapping based on magnetic field measurements,

    X. Wang, C. Zhang, F. Liu, Y . Dong, and X. Xu, “Exponentially weighted particle filter for simultaneous localization and mapping based on magnetic field measurements,”IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 66, no. 7, pp. 1658–1667, 2017

    work page 2017

  31. [31]

    Study on an indoor positioning system using earth’s magnetic field,

    S.-C. Yeh, W.-H. Hsu, W.-Y . Lin, and Y .-F. Wu, “Study on an indoor positioning system using earth’s magnetic field,”IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 69, no. 3, pp. 865–872, 2020

    work page 2020

  32. [32]

    Global localization in repetitive and ambiguous environments,

    Z. Wu, W. Wang, J. Zhang, Q. Lyu, H. Zhang, and D. Wang, “Global localization in repetitive and ambiguous environments,” in2023 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 12374–12380, 2023

    work page 2023

  33. [33]

    Locateme: Magnetic-fields- based indoor localization using smartphones,

    K. P. Subbu, B. Gozick, and R. Dantu, “Locateme: Magnetic-fields- based indoor localization using smartphones,”ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol., vol. 4, Oct. 2013

    work page 2013

  34. [34]

    Compensation method for the carrier magnetic interference of underwater magnetic vector measure- ment system,

    S. Li, D. Cheng, Y . Wang, and J. Zhao, “Compensation method for the carrier magnetic interference of underwater magnetic vector measure- ment system,”IEEE Sensors Journal, vol. 23, no. 10, pp. 10694–10705, 2023

    work page 2023

  35. [35]

    C. E. Rasmussen and C. K. I. Williams,Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning. The MIT Press, 2006

    work page 2006

  36. [36]

    S- gpr: Sliding gaussian process regression-based magnetic mapping and evaluation of different magnetic mapping methods,

    Q. Lyu, Z. Wu, H. Shen, W. Wang, J. Zhang, H. Zhou, and D. Wang, “S- gpr: Sliding gaussian process regression-based magnetic mapping and evaluation of different magnetic mapping methods,” inIECON 2024 - 50th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, pp. 1–7, 2024

    work page 2024

  37. [37]

    Integrating generic sensor fusion algorithms with sound state representations through encap- sulation of manifolds,

    C. Hertzberg, R. Wagner, U. Frese, and L. Schr ¨oder, “Integrating generic sensor fusion algorithms with sound state representations through encap- sulation of manifolds,”Information Fusion, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 57–77, 2013

    work page 2013

  38. [38]

    Cte-mlo: Continuous-time and efficient multi-lidar odometry with localizability-aware point cloud sampling,

    H. Shen, Z. Wu, Y . Hui, W. Wang, Q. Lyu, T. Deng, Y . Zhu, B. Tian, and D. Wang, “Cte-mlo: Continuous-time and efficient multi-lidar odometry with localizability-aware point cloud sampling,”IEEE Transactions on Field Robotics, vol. 2, pp. 165–187, 2025. Qiyang Lyureceived his B.Eng degree of Electronic Information Engineering from University of Elec- tro...

    work page 2025

  39. [39]

    Currently, he is Emeritus Professor and was the Director of the ST Engineering-NTU Robotics Corporate Lab

    Since 1989, he has been with the School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. Currently, he is Emeritus Professor and was the Director of the ST Engineering-NTU Robotics Corporate Lab. He is the Chair of IEEE Singapore Robotics and Automation Chapter and a senator in NTU Academics Council. He has served as ...

    work page 1989