pith. sign in

arxiv: 2602.14181 · v2 · pith:WN3SLA6Gnew · submitted 2026-02-15 · 📡 eess.SP

Magnetic-Field-Based Localization Using Spatial Field Variations: Signal Processing Principles, Models, and Challenges

Isaac Skog , Manon Kok , Christophe Prieur , Gustaf Hendeby This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-21 12:53 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SP
keywords magnetic field localizationspatial variationssignal processingindoor positioninginertial navigationstatistical inferencesensor calibrationEarth's magnetic field
0
0 comments X

The pith

Magnetic field spatial variations support decimeter indoor localization and outdoor accuracy on par with strategic-grade inertial systems.

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

This review paper lays out signal processing methods for localization that use changes in the Earth's magnetic field across space. It gathers existing techniques into one shared parametric model so that standard statistical inference tools can be applied to state estimation, field modeling, and sensor calibration. A sympathetic reader cares because the approach promises accurate positioning in places where satellite signals are unavailable or unreliable. The overview makes clear both the performance levels already reached and the main technical obstacles that remain. By showing similarities across methods, the paper helps readers see how to combine or improve them.

Core claim

Contemporary techniques that exploit spatial variations in the magnetic field achieve decimeter-level accuracy for indoor localization and outdoor accuracy comparable to strategic-grade inertial navigation systems. The paper presents these technologies inside a common parametric signal-model framework that is compatible with established statistical inference methods for state estimation, magnetic-field modeling, and sensor calibration, while also identifying open research challenges from a signal-processing viewpoint.

What carries the argument

A common parametric signal-model framework that unifies magnetic-field localization methods and permits direct use of statistical inference techniques.

If this is right

  • Indoor positioning reaches decimeter accuracy without relying on radio infrastructure or satellite signals.
  • Outdoor navigation achieves performance levels previously limited to high-end inertial systems using only passive magnetic sensors.
  • Signal processing for statistical inference, field modeling, and calibration becomes the central engineering task for realizing these accuracies.
  • A unified model framework reveals which existing methods share core principles and where they diverge.
  • Open challenges in modeling and calibration point to the next concrete improvements needed.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If magnetic signatures remain consistent over years, pre-built maps could serve as long-term references for repeated navigation tasks without frequent updates.
  • Integration with inertial sensors could cut long-term drift more than either method alone, though the paper does not quantify the combined performance.
  • Extending the parametric framework to include time-varying disturbances such as nearby vehicles or construction might address one of the listed open challenges.
  • Large-scale field trials across multiple building types and terrain would provide the missing empirical check on whether the accuracy claims hold outside controlled tests.

Load-bearing premise

Spatial variations in the Earth's magnetic field stay distinctive, stable, and measurable enough to deliver the claimed accuracy levels in diverse real-world settings.

What would settle it

A controlled experiment that maps the same indoor or outdoor area at intervals of several months and finds that the magnetic signatures have shifted enough to cause localization errors larger than one decimeter would disprove the stability premise.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.14181 by Christophe Prieur, Gustaf Hendeby, Isaac Skog, Manon Kok.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Although the figure illustrates the spatial variations in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Examples of the spatial variations in the magnetic field-magnitude indoors and outdoors. Also shown in (a) are the three [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Illustration of localization using magnetic-field map-matching. The inference algorithm alternates between comparing [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: At top, an array with 30 vector magnetometers mea [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Signal processing has played, and continues to play, a fundamental role in the evolution of modern localization technologies. Localization using spatial variations in the Earth's magnetic field is no exception. It relies on signal-processing methods for statistical state inference, magnetic-field modeling, and sensor calibration. Contemporary localization techniques based on spatial variations in the magnetic field can provide decimeter-level indoor localization accuracy and outdoor localization accuracy on par with strategic-grade inertial navigation systems. This article provides a broad, high-level overview of current signal-processing principles and open research challenges in localization using spatial variations in the Earth's magnetic field. The aim is to provide the reader with an understanding of the similarities and differences among existing key technologies from a statistical signal-processing perspective. To that end, existing key technologies will be presented within a common parametric signal-model framework compatible with well-established statistical inference methods.

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. This manuscript provides a high-level overview of signal-processing principles, models, and challenges in localization using spatial variations in the Earth's magnetic field. It frames existing key technologies within a common parametric signal-model framework compatible with statistical inference methods for state estimation, field modeling, and sensor calibration. The paper asserts that contemporary techniques achieve decimeter-level indoor localization accuracy and outdoor accuracy comparable to strategic-grade inertial navigation systems.

Significance. If the survey accurately synthesizes the cited literature and the unifying parametric framework proves insightful for connecting disparate approaches, the work could serve as a useful reference for researchers in magnetic localization and statistical signal processing. It explicitly highlights the role of signal processing across modeling, inference, and calibration while identifying open challenges. The significance is limited, however, by the absence of new empirical validation, derivations, or quantitative checks on field distinctiveness and stability; the accuracy claims rest entirely on summaries of prior work.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that contemporary techniques provide decimeter-level indoor accuracy and outdoor performance on par with strategic-grade INS is stated without accompanying citations, quantitative summaries, or references to the specific empirical studies that establish these performance levels. As a survey whose value depends on faithful representation of the literature, this assertion requires explicit linkage to the supporting references in the main text to allow assessment of the evidence base.
  2. The overview implies that spatial magnetic-field variations are sufficiently distinctive, temporally stable, and measurable above sensor noise across environments to support the stated accuracies, yet provides no critical discussion, bounds, or counterexamples drawn from the cited works regarding potential violations (e.g., temporal drift or local anomalies). This assumption is load-bearing for the performance claims but is not examined within the manuscript's scope.
minor comments (2)
  1. Clarify in the introduction or framework section how the common parametric signal model directly maps onto the statistical inference methods used in the referenced technologies, including any notational conventions for the field parameters.
  2. Ensure consistent use of terminology (e.g., 'spatial variations' vs. 'anomalies') when contrasting indoor and outdoor scenarios.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments on our survey manuscript. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to strengthen the linkage to the literature and to provide a more explicit critical discussion of key assumptions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that contemporary techniques provide decimeter-level indoor accuracy and outdoor performance on par with strategic-grade INS is stated without accompanying citations, quantitative summaries, or references to the specific empirical studies that establish these performance levels. As a survey whose value depends on faithful representation of the literature, this assertion requires explicit linkage to the supporting references in the main text to allow assessment of the evidence base.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract performance claims require explicit support from the literature. In the revised manuscript we have added citations to representative empirical studies reporting decimeter-level indoor accuracy and outdoor performance comparable to strategic-grade INS; these references appear in the abstract (where journal style permits) and are elaborated with quantitative summaries in the introduction and the sections on indoor and outdoor localization. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The overview implies that spatial magnetic-field variations are sufficiently distinctive, temporally stable, and measurable above sensor noise across environments to support the stated accuracies, yet provides no critical discussion, bounds, or counterexamples drawn from the cited works regarding potential violations (e.g., temporal drift or local anomalies). This assumption is load-bearing for the performance claims but is not examined within the manuscript's scope.

    Authors: The manuscript already identifies open challenges in field modeling and stability. We nevertheless acknowledge that a more dedicated critical examination of assumptions regarding distinctiveness, temporal stability, and noise margins would be valuable. We have expanded the Research Challenges section to include explicit discussion of potential violations such as temporal drift and local anomalies, together with bounds and counterexamples drawn from the cited works. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Survey overview places existing magnetic localization methods in a common framework with no load-bearing self-derivations or fitted predictions

full rationale

The manuscript is explicitly a high-level overview and tutorial-style survey that summarizes signal-processing principles from prior literature and places them inside a parametric model framework. The accuracy statements (decimeter indoor, strategic-grade outdoor) are presented as properties of 'contemporary techniques' rather than results derived from any equations, fits, or models introduced in this paper. No self-definitional loops, fitted-input predictions, or uniqueness theorems imported from the authors' own prior work appear in the abstract or framing. External citations supply the empirical support, satisfying the criterion for independent evidence. Minor self-citation is possible in a survey but is not load-bearing for any central claim here.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

This is a review/overview paper; no new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are introduced by the authors.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5679 in / 970 out tokens · 49139 ms · 2026-05-21T12:53:09.611021+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 60 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

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

    B. Li, T. Gallagher, A. G. Dempster, and C. Rizos, “How feasible is the use of magnetic field alone for indoor positioning?” inProceedings of International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), Sydney, Australia, Nov. 2012, pp. 1–9

    work page 2012

  2. [2]

    Quantum-assured magnetic navigation achieves positioning accuracy better than a strategic-grade INS in airborne and ground-based field trials,

    M. Muradoglu, M. T. Johnsson, N. M. Wilson, Y . Cohen, D. Shin, T. Navickas, T. Pyragius, D. Thomas, D. Thompson, S. I. Mooreet al., “Quantum-assured magnetic navigation achieves positioning accuracy better than a strategic-grade INS in airborne and ground-based field trials,”arXiv:2504.08167, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  3. [3]

    A survey of magnetic-field-based indoor localization,

    G. Ouyang and K. Abed-Meraim, “A survey of magnetic-field-based indoor localization,”Electronics, vol. 11, no. 6, 2022

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    Magnetic field-based positioning systems,

    V . Pasku, A. De Angelis, G. De Angelis, D. D. Arumugam, M. Dionigi, P. Carbone, A. Moschitta, and D. S. Ricketts, “Magnetic field-based positioning systems,”IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 2003–2017, 2017

    work page 2003

  5. [5]

    A review on magnetic-assisted localization for mobile robots,

    W. Lei, C. Zhang, Z. Jin, and J. Chen, “A review on magnetic-assisted localization for mobile robots,”Measurement, p. 116643, 2025

    work page 2025

  6. [6]

    Geomagnetism for smartphone-based indoor localization: Challenges, advances, and comparisons,

    S. He and K. G. Shin, “Geomagnetism for smartphone-based indoor localization: Challenges, advances, and comparisons,”ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), vol. 50, no. 6, pp. 1–37, 2017

    work page 2017

  7. [7]

    Geomagnetic navigation beyond the magnetic compass,

    F. Goldenberg, “Geomagnetic navigation beyond the magnetic compass,” inProc. of IEEE/ION PLANS, San Diego, CA, Apr. 2006, pp. 684–694

    work page 2006

  8. [8]

    Simultaneous localization and calibration (SLAC) methods for a train-mounted magne- tometer,

    B. Siebler, A. Lehner, S. Sand, and U. D. Hanebeck, “Simultaneous localization and calibration (SLAC) methods for a train-mounted magne- tometer,”NAVIGATION: Journal of the Institute of Navigation, vol. 70, no. 1, 2023

    work page 2023

  9. [9]

    Characterization of the indoor magnetic field for applications in local- ization and mapping,

    M. Angermann, M. Frassl, M. Doniec, B. J. Julian, and P. Robertson, “Characterization of the indoor magnetic field for applications in local- ization and mapping,” inProceedings of International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), Sydney, Australia, Nov. 2012, pp. 1–9

    work page 2012

  10. [10]

    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,” inProceedings of 21th IEEE International Conference on Information Fusion (FUSION), Cambridge, UK, Jul. 10– 13 2018, pp. 1353–1360

    work page 2018

  11. [11]

    Spatially scalable recursive estimation of Gaussian process terrain maps using local basis functions,

    F. M. Viset, R. Helmons, and M. Kok, “Spatially scalable recursive estimation of Gaussian process terrain maps using local basis functions,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 73, pp. 1444–1453, Mar. 2025

    work page 2025

  12. [12]

    Hilbert space methods for reduced-rank gaussian process regression,

    A. Solin and S. S ¨arkk¨a, “Hilbert space methods for reduced-rank gaussian process regression,”Statistics and Computing, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 419–446, Aug. 2020

    work page 2020

  13. [13]

    Linearly con- strained Gaussian processes,

    C. Jidling, N. Wahlstr ¨om, A. Wills, and T. B. Sch ¨on, “Linearly con- strained Gaussian processes,”Advances in Neural Information Process- ing Systems, vol. 30, 2017

    work page 2017

  14. [14]

    Magnetic field mapping of inaccessible regions using physics-informed neural networks,

    U. H. Coskun, B. Sel, and B. Plaster, “Magnetic field mapping of inaccessible regions using physics-informed neural networks,”Scientific Reports, vol. 12, no. 1, Jul. 2022

    work page 2022

  15. [15]

    Magnetic odometry-a model- based approach using a sensor array,

    I. Skog, G. Hendeby, and F. Gustafsson, “Magnetic odometry-a model- based approach using a sensor array,” inProceedings of 21th IEEE International Conference on Information Fusion (FUSION), Cambridge, UK, Jul. 10–13 2018, pp. 794–798

    work page 2018

  16. [16]

    Modeling magnetic fields using Gaussian processes,

    N. Wahlstr ¨om, M. Kok, T. B. Sch ¨on, and F. Gustafsson, “Modeling magnetic fields using Gaussian processes,” inProceedings of the 38th International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP), Vancouver, Canada, May 2013, pp. 3522–3526

    work page 2013

  17. [17]

    Indoor localization through dynamic time warping,

    K. P. Subbu, B. Gozick, and R. Dantu, “Indoor localization through dynamic time warping,” inProceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Anchorage, AK, Oct. 2011, pp. 1639–1644

    work page 2011

  18. [18]

    A review of magnetic sensors,

    J. E. Lenz, “A review of magnetic sensors,”Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 78, no. 6, pp. 973–989, Jun. 1990

    work page 1990

  19. [19]

    Advances in magnetometry,

    A. Edelstein, “Advances in magnetometry,”Journal of Physics: Con- densed Matter, vol. 19, no. 16, p. 165217, Apr. 2007

    work page 2007

  20. [20]

    MAINS: A magnetic-field-aided inertial navigation system for indoor positioning,

    C. Huang, G. Hendeby, H. Fourati, C. Prieur, and I. Skog, “MAINS: A magnetic-field-aided inertial navigation system for indoor positioning,” IEEE Sensors Journal, vol. 24, no. 9, pp. 15 156–15 166, Mar. 2024

    work page 2024

  21. [21]

    Complete triaxis mag- netometer calibration in the magnetic domain,

    V . Renaudin, M. H. Afzal, and G. Lachapelle, “Complete triaxis mag- netometer calibration in the magnetic domain,”Journal of Sensors, vol. 2010, no. 1, Dec. 2010

    work page 2010

  22. [22]

    Magnetic field sensors’ calibration: Algorithms’ overview and comparison,

    K. Papafotis, D. Nikitas, and P. P. Sotiriadis, “Magnetic field sensors’ calibration: Algorithms’ overview and comparison,”Sensors, vol. 21, no. 16, Aug. 2021

    work page 2021

  23. [23]

    A modified tolles–lawson model robust to the errors of the three-axis strapdown magnetometer,

    Q. Han, Z. Dou, X. Tong, X. Peng, and H. Guo, “A modified tolles–lawson model robust to the errors of the three-axis strapdown magnetometer,”IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 334–338, Mar. 2017

    work page 2017

  24. [24]

    Magnetometer calibration using inertial sensors,

    M. Kok and T. B. Sch ¨on, “Magnetometer calibration using inertial sensors,”IEEE Sensors Journal, vol. 16, no. 14, pp. 5679–5689, 2016

    work page 2016

  25. [25]

    Using inertial sensors for position and orientation estimation,

    M. Kok, J. D. Hol, and T. B. Sch ¨on, “Using inertial sensors for position and orientation estimation,”Foundations and Trends on Signal Processing, vol. 11, no. 1–2, pp. 1–153, 2017

    work page 2017

  26. [26]

    J. A. Farrell and M. Barth,The Global Positioning System and Inertial Navigation. New York, NY , USA: McGraw–Hill, 1998

    work page 1998

  27. [27]

    Kailath, A

    T. Kailath, A. H. Sayed, and B. Hassibi,Linear Estimation. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2000

    work page 2000

  28. [28]

    Modeling and interpolation of the ambient magnetic field by gaussian processes,

    A. Solin, M. Kok, N. Wahlstr ¨om, T. B. Sch¨on, and S. S¨arkk¨a, “Modeling and interpolation of the ambient magnetic field by gaussian processes,” IEEE Transactions on Reliability, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 1112–1127, Jun. 2018

    work page 2018

  29. [29]

    Magnetic-field based odometry — An optical flow inspired approach,

    I. Skog, G. Hendeby, and F. Trulsson, “Magnetic-field based odometry — An optical flow inspired approach,” inProceedings of International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), Lloret de Mar, Spain, Nov. 29–Dec. 2 2021

    work page 2021

  30. [30]

    Large scale mapping of indoor magnetic field by local and sparse Gaussian processes,

    I. Abdul-Raouf, V . Gay-Bellile, S. Bourgeois, and A. Paljic, “Large scale mapping of indoor magnetic field by local and sparse Gaussian processes,” inProceedings of the 8th Annual Conference on Robot Learning (CoRL), Munich, Germany, Nov. 2024

    work page 2024

  31. [31]

    Simultaneous localization and map- ping: part I,

    H. Durrant-Whyte and T. Bailey, “Simultaneous localization and map- ping: part I,”IEEE Robotics and Automation Magazine, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 99–110, Jun. 2006

    work page 2006

  32. [32]

    On the connection between magnetic-field odometry aided inertial navigation and magnetic-field SLAM,

    I. Skog, M. Kok, G. Hendeby, C. Huang, and T. Edridge, “On the connection between magnetic-field odometry aided inertial navigation and magnetic-field SLAM,” inProceedings of IEEE/ION Position, Location and Navigation Symposium (PLANS), Salt-Lake City, UT, May 2025

    work page 2025

  33. [33]

    The invariant extended Kalman filter as a stable observer,

    A. Barrau and S. Bonnabel, “The invariant extended Kalman filter as a stable observer,”IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 62, no. 4, pp. 1797–1812, 2016

    work page 2016

  34. [34]

    Quaternion kinematics for the error-state Kalman filter

    J. Sola, “Quaternion kinematics for the error-state Kalman filter,” arXiv:1711.02508, 2017

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  35. [35]

    Terrain navigation in the magnetic landscape: Particle filtering for indoor positioning,

    A. Solin, S. S ¨arkk¨a, J. Kannala, and E. Rahtu, “Terrain navigation in the magnetic landscape: Particle filtering for indoor positioning,” in Proceedings of the European Navigation Conference, Helsinki, Finland, May 2016

    work page 2016

  36. [36]

    Tightly-coupled magneto-visual-inertial fusion for long term localiza- tion in indoor environment,

    J. Coulin, R. Guillemard, V . Gay-Bellile, C. Joly, and A. de La Fortelle, “Tightly-coupled magneto-visual-inertial fusion for long term localiza- tion in indoor environment,”IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 952–959, 2021

    work page 2021

  37. [37]

    Absolute positioning using the Earth’s magnetic anomaly field,

    A. Canciani and J. Raquet, “Absolute positioning using the Earth’s magnetic anomaly field,”NAVIGATION: Journal of the Institute of Navigation, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 111–126, 2016

    work page 2016

  38. [38]

    UJIIndoorLoc-Mag: A new database for magnetic field-based localiza- tion problems,

    J. Torres-Sospedra, D. Rambla, R. Montoliu, O. Belmonte, and J. Huerta, “UJIIndoorLoc-Mag: A new database for magnetic field-based localiza- tion problems,” inProceedings of International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), Banff, AB, Canada, Oct. 2015

    work page 2015

  39. [39]

    Magnetic field based indoor positioning using the bag of words paradigm,

    R. Montoliu, J. Torres-Sospedra, and O. Belmonte, “Magnetic field based indoor positioning using the bag of words paradigm,” inProceedings of 13 International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), Alcala de Henares, Spain, Oct. 2016

    work page 2016

  40. [40]

    AMID: Accurate magnetic indoor localization using deep learning,

    N. Lee, S. Ahn, and D. Han, “AMID: Accurate magnetic indoor localization using deep learning,”Sensors, vol. 18, no. 5, p. 1598, 2018

    work page 2018

  41. [41]

    Magnetic field sensing for pedestrian and robot indoor positioning,

    L. Antsfeld and B. Chidlovskii, “Magnetic field sensing for pedestrian and robot indoor positioning,” inProceedings of International Confer- ence on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), Lloret de Mar, Spain, Nov. 29–Dec. 2 2021

    work page 2021

  42. [42]

    Bayesian Cram ´er-Rao lower bound for magnetic field-based localization,

    B. Siebler, S. Sand, and U. D. Hanebeck, “Bayesian Cram ´er-Rao lower bound for magnetic field-based localization,”IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 123 080–123 093, 2022

    work page 2022

  43. [43]

    An extended Kalman filter for magnetic field SLAM using Gaussian process regression,

    F. M. 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

  44. [44]

    Simul- taneous localization and mapping using ambient magnetic field,

    I. Vallivaara, J. Haverinen, A. Kemppainen, and J. R ¨oning, “Simul- taneous localization and mapping using ambient magnetic field,” in Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Multisensor Fusion and Integration for Intelligent Systems (MFI), Salt Lake City, UT, USA, September 2010, pp. 14–19

    work page 2010

  45. [45]

    MagSLAM: Aerial simultaneous local- ization and mapping using earth’s magnetic anomaly field,

    T. N. Lee and A. J. Canciani, “MagSLAM: Aerial simultaneous local- ization and mapping using earth’s magnetic anomaly field,”Navigation, vol. 67, no. 1, pp. 95–107, 2020

    work page 2020

  46. [46]

    Sequence-based magnetic loop closures for auto- mated signal surveying,

    C. Gao and R. Harle, “Sequence-based magnetic loop closures for auto- mated signal surveying,” inProceedings of International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), Banff, AB, Canada, Oct. 2015, pp. 1–12

    work page 2015

  47. [47]

    Online one-dimensional magnetic field SLAM with loop-closure detection,

    M. Kok and A. Solin, “Online one-dimensional magnetic field SLAM with loop-closure detection,” inProceedings of IEEE International Con- ference on Multisensor Fusion and Integration for Intelligent Systems (MFI), 2024, pp. 1–7

    work page 2024

  48. [48]

    Magnetic field constraints and sequence- based matching for indoor pose graph SLAM,

    J. Jung, T. Oh, and H. Myung, “Magnetic field constraints and sequence- based matching for indoor pose graph SLAM,”Robotics and Au- tonomous Systems, vol. 70, pp. 92–105, Aug. 2015

    work page 2015

  49. [49]

    Magnetic field mapping of railway lines with graph SLAM,

    B. Siebler, A. Lehner, S. Sand, and U. D. Hanebeck, “Magnetic field mapping of railway lines with graph SLAM,” inProceedings of 27th IEEE International Conference on Information Fusion (FUSION), Venice, Italy, Jul. 7–11 2024

    work page 2024

  50. [50]

    Keyframe based large- scale indoor localisation using geomagnetic field and motion pattern,

    S. Wang, H. Wen, R. Clark, and N. Trigoni, “Keyframe based large- scale indoor localisation using geomagnetic field and motion pattern,” inProceedings of the IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS), 2016, pp. 1910–1917

    work page 2016

  51. [51]

    Rao-Blackwellized particle smoothing for simultaneous localization and mapping,

    M. Kok, A. Solin, and T. B. Sch ¨on, “Rao-Blackwellized particle smoothing for simultaneous localization and mapping,”Data-Centric Engineering, 2024, 5:e15

    work page 2024

  52. [52]

    Saying goodbyes to rotating your phone: Magnetometer calibration during SLAM–Extended version,

    I. Vallivaara, Y . Dong, B. Duan, and T. Arslan, “Saying goodbyes to rotating your phone: Magnetometer calibration during SLAM–Extended version,”IEEE Journal of Indoor and Seamless Positioning and Navi- gation, 2026

    work page 2026

  53. [53]

    MSCEKF-MIO: Magnetic-inertial odometry based on multi-state constraint extended Kalman filter,

    J. Li, J. Kuang, and X. Niu, “MSCEKF-MIO: Magnetic-inertial odometry based on multi-state constraint extended Kalman filter,” arXiv:2505.12634.08167, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  54. [54]

    Motion estimation of a rigid body with an EKF using magneto-inertial measurements,

    C. I. Chesneau, M. Hillion, and C. Prieur, “Motion estimation of a rigid body with an EKF using magneto-inertial measurements,” in Proceedings of International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN), Alcala de Henares, Spain, Oct. 2016

    work page 2016

  55. [55]

    Magnetic field gradient-based EKF for velocity estimation in indoor navigation,

    M. Zmitri, H. Fourati, and C. Prieur, “Magnetic field gradient-based EKF for velocity estimation in indoor navigation,”Sensors, vol. 20, no. 20, 2020

    work page 2020

  56. [56]

    Cram ´er-Rao lower bound for magnetic field-based velocity estimation of trains,

    B. Merk, B. Siebler, and S. Sand, “Cram ´er-Rao lower bound for magnetic field-based velocity estimation of trains,” inProceedings of IEEE International Conference on Multisensor Fusion and Integration for Intelligent Systems (MFI), College Station, TX, Sep. 2025

    work page 2025

  57. [57]

    Underwater quantum magnetometer array aid inertial navigation – Feasibility and challenges: Technical report from the vinnova ENOK project 2024-03194,

    I. Skog, M. Nordenvaad Lundberg, E. Gudmundson, M. Brodin-Laakso, A. G ¨allstr¨om, A. Fagergren, and P. Sigray, “Underwater quantum magnetometer array aid inertial navigation – Feasibility and challenges: Technical report from the vinnova ENOK project 2024-03194,” KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, Technical Report, 2025

    work page 2024

  58. [58]

    Using magnetic disturbances to improve IMU-based position estimation,

    D. Vissi `ere, A. Martin, and N. Petit, “Using magnetic disturbances to improve IMU-based position estimation,” inProceedings of European Control Conference, Kos, Greece, Jul. 2007, pp. 2853–2858

    work page 2007

  59. [59]

    Improved towed airborne three-axis magnetic gradient anomalies navigation,

    S. Xu, Z. Jin, G. Jiang, G. Zhang, J. Liang, W. Sun, L. Zhang, Z. Fan, and G. Dong, “Improved towed airborne three-axis magnetic gradient anomalies navigation,”IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 73, pp. 1–12, Nov. 2024

    work page 2024

  60. [60]

    Interference model guided neural network for aeromagnetic compensation,

    Y . Xu, Z. Liu, Q. Zhang, X. Liu, B. Huang, M. Pan, J. Hu, D. Chen, T. Ying, and X. Qiu, “Interference model guided neural network for aeromagnetic compensation,”IEEE Sensors Journal, vol. 24, no. 8, pp. 12 266–12 275, Mar. 2024. AUTHORS Isaac Skogreceived his MSc degree in Electrical Engineering from KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, ...

    work page 2024