3 ms·

Thanks for those links - I think they frame the progress on localization really nicely. They also make clear the improvements are based on fusion of GPS + wifi

by binoct 10y ago

Thanks for those links - I think they frame the progress on localization really nicely. They also make clear the improvements are based on fusion of GPS + wifi + IMU/sensors. Adding IMu data to the existing mix is a clear win, but there's a major difference between that and using the IMU for dead reckoning alone. I think that's worth clarifying since the thread started out talking about localization with wifi disabled (although disabled clearly doesn't quite mean what you think it might in this context.)

dogma1138 10y ago
Oh no they don't use that alone, the amount of data they receive from the sensors and how it factors into everything also varies, if you got that impression it's my bad, I thought I was clear that when you enable the "location services" in Android it works all the time in the background regardless of what you have explicitly enabled or not they even state that when you turn it on. Pretty much the IMU data is used to prevent jumps, enable them to use better path predicting algorithms and to provide coverage in doors, if you don't want them tracking you disable the background location services, or well sadly don't take the phone with you. P.S. I'm pretty sure that iOS has the same thing, I also know that there are a few startups that want to push their own location provider service including sensor based tracking, I've played around with pathsense their location API was faster and considerably* more accurate than Google's https://pathsense.com https://pathsense.com *As far as jitter goes, if you are talking about accuracy only to the point of "is jim at the juicebar on the corner of Main St. and 8th.?" they both work pretty much the same.