Excitation-Supervised Closed-Loop Self-Calibration and Target Seeking for an Unknown-Pose Range-Bearing Relay
arXiv:2608.12528v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: A vehicle seeking a hidden target through a range-bearing relay of unknown position and yaw must decide, online, whether its own motion has already made the relay calibration trustworthy, and what to do when it has not. Two distinct vehicle-relative observations are known to remove the calibration gauge and make the target's relay-local packet globally actionable (arXiv:2608.09464), but that statement is static: it classifies a stored window onl
Overview
arXiv:2608.12528v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: A vehicle seeking a hidden target through a range-bearing relay of unknown position and yaw must decide, online, whether its own motion has already made the relay calibration trustworthy, and what to do when it has not. Two distinct vehicle-relative observations are known to remove the calibration gauge and make the target's relay-local packet globally actionable (arXiv:2608.09464), but that statement is static: it classifies a stored window only after the fact. This paper supplies the closed-loop layer: we show that the trajectory-spread margin $S_v$ that governs identifiability is simultaneously a finite-noise seed-accuracy bound, a local-vector variance decomposition, and a circle-geometry excitation budget, and we use it to supervise an excitation-reset controller. An excitation-supervised algorithm retriggers exploratory motion whenever the spread certificate is insufficient, projecting the target-seeking input away from the excitation's push, and otherwise proceeds to unrestricted target seeking. Under explicit sampling assumptions the supervision rule provably acquires any required excitation in finite time; in the noiseless local regime with positive excitation decay, estimator convergence yields target-seeking convergence after certification; and the threshold is selected from a desired calibration-accuracy level rather than chosen heuristically. Closed-loop simulation, paired Monte Carlo comparisons, a spread-threshold ablation, and a ROS 2/Gazebo software-in-the-loop experiment with sensing delay validate the approach. A decay-rate sweep shows that supervision matters when a fixed schedule's decay outruns the unknown time-to-adequate-excitation: over 100 paired trials the fixed baseline's yaw RMSE rises from 0.010 to 0.065 rad and success falls to 56%, while target-tracking error remains insensitive; supervision keeps yaw RMSE between 0.0095 and 0.0191 rad with 100% success.
Source
Originally published at arxiv.org.
Related Articles
- AMR-Pose: An Active LED Marker-Based Relative Pose Estimation Framework With Probabilistic Switching PnP for Cooperative AUVs
- Attention from Action, for Action: Emergent Visual Bottlenecks for Policy Learning
- OpenRC: An Open-Source Robotic Colonoscopy Framework for Multimodal Data Acquisition and Autonomy Research
Source: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.12528