gradient descent filter (qgrad) Search Results


gradient descent filter (qgrad)  (MOCAP Inc)
90
MOCAP Inc gradient descent filter (qgrad)
Accelerometer trust values.
Gradient Descent Filter (Qgrad), supplied by MOCAP Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/gradient+descent+filter+%28qgrad%29/pmc08537168-115-26-22?v=MOCAP+Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
gradient descent filter (qgrad) - by Bioz Stars, 2026-07
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

Image Search Results


Accelerometer trust values.

Journal: Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)

Article Title: Validation of 3-Space Wireless Inertial Measurement Units Using an Industrial Robot

doi: 10.3390/s21206858

Figure Lengend Snippet: Accelerometer trust values.

Article Snippet: IMU orientation was calculated from raw accelerometer, gyroscope, and magnetometer values using one of the sensor fusion methods available through the 3-Space Mocap Studio program: the gradient descent filter (QGrad), the complementary filter (QComp), or the Kalman filter.

Techniques:

RMSE of the angular difference between measured and reference values for each IMU data fusion method during rotation, translation, and stationary sequences. Axis refers to the IMU axis of rotation for the rotation sequence and the IMU axis aligned with gravity for the stationary trial.

Journal: Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)

Article Title: Validation of 3-Space Wireless Inertial Measurement Units Using an Industrial Robot

doi: 10.3390/s21206858

Figure Lengend Snippet: RMSE of the angular difference between measured and reference values for each IMU data fusion method during rotation, translation, and stationary sequences. Axis refers to the IMU axis of rotation for the rotation sequence and the IMU axis aligned with gravity for the stationary trial.

Article Snippet: IMU orientation was calculated from raw accelerometer, gyroscope, and magnetometer values using one of the sensor fusion methods available through the 3-Space Mocap Studio program: the gradient descent filter (QGrad), the complementary filter (QComp), or the Kalman filter.

Techniques: Sequencing

Results of ANOVA and multiple comparison tests for the difference in mean error for QComp, QGrad, and Kalman filters. Axis refers to the IMU axis of rotation for the rotation sequence and the IMU axis aligned with gravity for the stationary trial. Significant differences ( p < 0.05) indicated with an asterisk (*). Multiple comparison test results are not included for the Kalman filter with the magnetometer enabled because it is the instances of comparable performance that are of interest in this case.

Journal: Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)

Article Title: Validation of 3-Space Wireless Inertial Measurement Units Using an Industrial Robot

doi: 10.3390/s21206858

Figure Lengend Snippet: Results of ANOVA and multiple comparison tests for the difference in mean error for QComp, QGrad, and Kalman filters. Axis refers to the IMU axis of rotation for the rotation sequence and the IMU axis aligned with gravity for the stationary trial. Significant differences ( p < 0.05) indicated with an asterisk (*). Multiple comparison test results are not included for the Kalman filter with the magnetometer enabled because it is the instances of comparable performance that are of interest in this case.

Article Snippet: IMU orientation was calculated from raw accelerometer, gyroscope, and magnetometer values using one of the sensor fusion methods available through the 3-Space Mocap Studio program: the gradient descent filter (QGrad), the complementary filter (QComp), or the Kalman filter.

Techniques: Comparison, Sequencing

Results of ANOVA and multiple comparison tests for the difference in mean error about X, Y, and Z axes at 45°/s for each filter without the magnetometer. Significant differences ( p < 0.05) indicated with an asterisk (*).

Journal: Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)

Article Title: Validation of 3-Space Wireless Inertial Measurement Units Using an Industrial Robot

doi: 10.3390/s21206858

Figure Lengend Snippet: Results of ANOVA and multiple comparison tests for the difference in mean error about X, Y, and Z axes at 45°/s for each filter without the magnetometer. Significant differences ( p < 0.05) indicated with an asterisk (*).

Article Snippet: IMU orientation was calculated from raw accelerometer, gyroscope, and magnetometer values using one of the sensor fusion methods available through the 3-Space Mocap Studio program: the gradient descent filter (QGrad), the complementary filter (QComp), or the Kalman filter.

Techniques: Comparison

Results of ANOVA and multiple comparison tests for the difference in mean error during rotations executed at 45°/s, 90°/s, and 360°/s. Significant differences ( p < 0.05) indicated with an asterisk (*).

Journal: Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)

Article Title: Validation of 3-Space Wireless Inertial Measurement Units Using an Industrial Robot

doi: 10.3390/s21206858

Figure Lengend Snippet: Results of ANOVA and multiple comparison tests for the difference in mean error during rotations executed at 45°/s, 90°/s, and 360°/s. Significant differences ( p < 0.05) indicated with an asterisk (*).

Article Snippet: IMU orientation was calculated from raw accelerometer, gyroscope, and magnetometer values using one of the sensor fusion methods available through the 3-Space Mocap Studio program: the gradient descent filter (QGrad), the complementary filter (QComp), or the Kalman filter.

Techniques: Comparison