Table 2.
(m) of the considered algorithms.
Algorithm | uMAP | uKF | KF [6] | EKF | UKF | PF | MAP | KF | WLS |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Scenario 1 | 2.88 | 3.15 | 4.31 | 2.78 | 7.16 | 2.60 | 2.87 | 3.13 | 4.22 |
Scenario 2 | 2.97 | 3.22 | 4.14 | 24 | 22 | 2.63 | 2.97 | 3.22 | 4.30 |
(m) of the considered algorithms.
Algorithm | uMAP | uKF | KF [6] | EKF | UKF | PF | MAP | KF | WLS |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Scenario 1 | 2.88 | 3.15 | 4.31 | 2.78 | 7.16 | 2.60 | 2.87 | 3.13 | 4.22 |
Scenario 2 | 2.97 | 3.22 | 4.14 | 24 | 22 | 2.63 | 2.97 | 3.22 | 4.30 |