Radar Visual Inertial Odometry and Radar Thermal Inertial Odometry: Robust Navigation even in Challenging Visual Conditions

Author(s):  
Christopher Doer ◽  
Gert F. Trommer
Keyword(s):  
2016 ◽  
Vol 42 (6) ◽  
pp. 626-633 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. N. Smetanin ◽  
G. V. Kozhina ◽  
A. K. Popov ◽  
Y. S. Levik

2015 ◽  
pp. 5-11
Author(s):  
Irving E. Bender ◽  
Henry A. Imus ◽  
John W. M. Rothney ◽  
Camilla Kemple ◽  
Mary R. England

IEEE Access ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 204902-204913
Author(s):  
Amre Eizad ◽  
Hosu Lee ◽  
Sanghun Pyo ◽  
Muhammad Raheel Afzal ◽  
Sung-Ki Lyu ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. 465-482 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle L. Cadieux ◽  
David I. Shore

Performance on tactile temporal order judgments (TOJs) is impaired when the hands are crossed over the midline. The cause of this effect appears to be tied to the use of an external reference frame, most likely based on visual information. We measured the effect of degrading the external reference frame on the crossed-hand deficit through restriction of visual information across three experiments. Experiments 1 and 2 examined three visual conditions (eyes open–lights on, eyes open–lights off, and eyes closed–lights off) while manipulating response demands; no effect of visual condition was seen. In Experiment 3, response demands were altered to be maximally connected to the internal reference frame and only two visual conditions were tested: eyes open–lights on, eyes closed–lights off. Blindfolded participants had a reduced crossed-hands deficit. Results are discussed in terms of the time needed to recode stimuli from an internal to an external reference frame and the role of conflict between these two reference frames in causing this effect.


2010 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 463-481 ◽  
Author(s):  
Baingio Pinna

AbstractThe psychophysical methods were developed by Fechner to find out the perceptual threshold of a stimulus, that is, the weakest stimulus that could be perceived. In spite of the strong efficiency in measuring thresholds, psychophysics does not help to define the multiplicity and complexity of possible percepts emerging from the same stimulus conditions, and accordingly, of what we perceive. In order to define what we perceive it is also necessary to define what we can perceive within the multiplicity of possible visual outcomes and how they are reciprocally organized. Usually the main experimental task is aimed at focusing on the specific attribute to be measured: what comes before psychophysics, i.e., the phenomenological exploration, is typically not fully investigated either epistemologically or phenomenally, even if it assumes a basic role in the process of scientific discovery. In this work, the importance of the traditional approach is not denied. Our main purpose is to place the two approaches side by side so that they complement each other: the phenomenological exploration complements the quantitative psychophysical measurement of the qualities that emerge through the preliminary exploration. To demonstrate the basic role played by the phenomenological exploration in complementing the psychophysical investigation we introduce three critical visual conditions, called visual gradient of perceptibility, perceptible invisibility and visual levels of perceptibility. Through these conditions several new illusions are studied and some phenomenological rules are suggested.


Perception ◽  
1994 ◽  
Vol 23 (11) ◽  
pp. 1301-1312 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Predebon ◽  
Jacob Steven Woolley

The familiar-size cue to perceived depth was investigated in five experiments. The stimuli were stationary familiar objects viewed monocularly under otherwise completely darkened visual conditions. Perceived depth was measured directly with the method of verbal report and indirectly with the head-motion procedure. Although the familiar-size cue influenced verbal reports of the distances of the objects, it did not determine perceived depth as assessed with the head-motion procedure. These findings support the claim that familiar size is not a major determinant of perceived depth, and that cognitive or nonperceptual factors mediate the effects of familiar size on direct reports of depth and distance. Possible reasons for the failure of familiar size to influence the head-motion-derived measures of perceived depth are discussed with particular emphasis on the role of motion parallax in determining perceptions of depth and relative distance.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document