Comment by boothby
17 hours ago
Your phone has an accelerometer, which can be integrated twice to result in slightly accurate dead reckoning; just keep accumulating 3-vectors with every time-slice. That's a helluva lot easier than visual cues.
17 hours ago
Your phone has an accelerometer, which can be integrated twice to result in slightly accurate dead reckoning; just keep accumulating 3-vectors with every time-slice. That's a helluva lot easier than visual cues.
"slightly accurate" is the correct description, though -- dead reckoning on a cell-phone-class IMU accumulates drift too quickly to keep objects anchored in space for more than seconds at a time. You need something (visual odometry, SLAM) that provides long-term stability, even if it has short-term noise or poor availability, to fuse in.
When this topic comes up, I'm always happy to share this incredible lecture from many many years ago about sensor fusion and dead reckoning and how you _cannot_ integrate acceleration twice:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7JQ7Rpwn2k&t=1401s (the whole video is incredible, but this timestamp is the magical bit)
12 years ago I had to write the firmware for an IMU. It took me some real effort to convince my bosses that double integration was, for all practical purposes, impossible. I wish I had known about this video back then...
IMU are very useful to known your orientation though. Even an inaccurate IMU is useful to provide an initial estimate to feed vision-based algorithms.
So you tend to need additional data or assumptions to constrain the double integral?