2018 25th International Conference on Telecommunications (ICT) 2018
DOI: 10.1109/ict.2018.8464842
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Dynamic Constrained Cooperative Localization Algorithm

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In Fig. 2 we compare the positioning performance of our EKF-STDF against the particle-based SPAWN [1], STOC-EKF [10], SPA-EKF [11] and NEBP [12], by considering a single agent of interest that may have insufficient spatial ranging measurements from time to time. We set the number of agents to 40 and l max = 30.…”
Section: Simulation Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…In Fig. 2 we compare the positioning performance of our EKF-STDF against the particle-based SPAWN [1], STOC-EKF [10], SPA-EKF [11] and NEBP [12], by considering a single agent of interest that may have insufficient spatial ranging measurements from time to time. We set the number of agents to 40 and l max = 30.…”
Section: Simulation Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since we consider a fully distributed network, it is sufficient to analyse the computational complexity imposed on a single agent during one time slot. Specifically, the proposed EKF-STDF has a complexity of O (N rel l max + log 2 (N rel l max )), while each of the particle-based schemes, e.g., the SPA-EKF [11], the particle-based SPAWN [1] and the NEBP [12], has a complexity of O (N rel N s l max + log 2 (N rel N s l max )). Here N rel is the number of neighbors of the agent considered, while N s denotes the number of particles required.…”
Section: Computational Complexitymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations