| Literature DB >> 25046019 |
Wei Gao1, Bo Zhao2, Guang Tao Zhou3, Qiu Ying Wang4, Chun Yang Yu5.
Abstract
Gravity matching navigation algorithm is one of the key technologies for gravity aided inertial navigation systems. With the development of intelligent algorithms, the powerful search ability of the Artificial Bee Colony (ABC) algorithm makes it possible to be applied to the gravity matching navigation field. However, existing search mechanisms of basic ABC algorithms cannot meet the need for high accuracy in gravity aided navigation. Firstly, proper modifications are proposed to improve the performance of the basic ABC algorithm. Secondly, a new search mechanism is presented in this paper which is based on an improved ABC algorithm using external speed information. At last, modified Hausdorff distance is introduced to screen the possible matching results. Both simulations and ocean experiments verify the feasibility of the method, and results show that the matching rate of the method is high enough to obtain a precise matching position.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25046019 PMCID: PMC4168447 DOI: 10.3390/s140712968
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1.Schematic diagram of gravity matching.
Relationship between the behavior of bees and the optimization problem.
| Position of nectar | Feasible solution |
| Yield of nectar | Value of fitness function |
| Honey speed | Converge speed |
| Greatest gains | Optimal solution |
Figure 2.Flowchart of basic ABC algorithm.
Figure 3.(a) Case of enlarging the range of the search step; (b) Case of lessening the range of the search step.
Figure 4.(a) Adjustment of transition probability (c is small); (b) Adjustment of transition probability (c is large).
Figure 5.Flow chart of improved ABC search.
Figure 6.Schematic diagram of multi-group single point search.
Figure 7.Schematic diagram of double-group constrained search.
Improved ABC Algorithm with single point search and constrained search.
| 1: Start |
|
|
| 2: Create randomly an initial population. |
| 3: for |
| 4: Produce a new nectar source population |
| 5: Restrict the position of bee colonies; set |
| 6: Calculate the fitness function value. |
| 7: Multi-group single point search. |
| 8: Bees in main bee colony are replaced by bees in sub bee colony with higher fitness value. |
| 9: Introduce the external velocity restriction. |
| 10: Calculate the probability values. |
| 11: Two groups of onlooker bees select employed bee by probability. |
| 12: Replace |
| 13: end for |
| 14: Screen the matching results using modified Hausdorff distance. |
| 15: Memorize the best solution achieved so far. |
| 16: End |
Basic test functions employed in the simulation experiment.
| Rosenbrock | [−2.048, 2.048] |
| |
| Griewank | [−600, 600] |
| |
| Weierstrass | [−0.5, 0.5] |
| |
| Schwefel | [−500, 500] |
|
Best results of basic test functions. (Dimension: 2, Colony Size: 10, Run times: 30, Maxcycles: 30,000).
| SF: 0.1 | 3.89 × 10° ± 1.49 × 10° | 6.81 × 10−1 ± 8.39 × 10−1 | 6.08 × 10° ± 1.46 × 10° | 1.40 × 103 ± 2.61 × 102 |
| 0.3 | 3.79 × 10° ± 1.99 × 10° | 7.15 × 10−2 ± 5.92 × 10−2 | 2.89 × 10° ± 1.26 × 10° | 9.49 × 102 ± 2.19 × 102 |
| 0.5 | 3.22 × 10° ± 2.05 × 10° | 3.87 × 10−2 ± 2.64 × 10−2 | 6.33 × 10−1 ± 7.00 × 10−1 | 3.59 × 102 ± 1.16 × 102 |
| 0.7 | 2.77 × 10° ± 2.26 × 10° | 2.00 × 10−2 ± 1.59 × 10−2 | 1.18 × 10−16 ± 6.38 × 10−16 | 3.20 × 102 ± 1.36 × 102 |
| (basic)1 | 2.08 × 10° ± 2.44 × 10° | 1.57 × 10−2 ± 9.06 × 10−3 | 9.01 × 10−6 ± 4.61 × 10−5 | 7.91 × 10° ± 2.95 × 101 |
| ASF | 6.15 × 10−1 ± 6.94 × 10−1 | 9.84 × 10−2 ± 1.02 × 10−1 | 1.33 × 10−8 ± 4.67 × 10−8 | 1.93 × 102 ± 4.59 × 101 |
|
| ||||
| 2.17 × 10° ± 4.33 × 10° | 1.49 × 10−3 ± 3.46 × 10−3 | 1.22 × 10−7 ± 1.30 × 10−7 | 6.69 × 101 ± 7.17 × 101 | |
| 1.0 | 1.40 × 10° ± 1.56 × 10° | 8.48 × 10−4 ± 2.53 × 10−3 | 9.25 × 10−8 ± 6.21 × 10−7 | 5.16 × 10° ± 8.75 × 101 |
| 5.0 | 6.83 × 10° ± 1.06 × 10° | 1.98 × 10−3 ± 3.68 × 10−3 | 4.31 × 10−9 ± 8.43 × 10−9 | 1.87 × 102 ± 2.76 × 102 |
| 10 | 9.91 × 10−1 ± 1.10 × 10-1 | 1.99 × 10−3 ± 3.51 × 10−3 | 7.28 × 10−9 ± 2.15 × 10−8 | 3.74 × 102 ± 6.42 × 101 |
| 15 | 9.22 × 10−1 ± 3.73 × 10-1 | 1.65 × 10−3 ± 3.38 × 10−3 | 1.34 × 10−8 ± 7.27 × 10−8 | 8.14 × 101 ± 3.89 × 101 |
| 20 | 1.73 × 10° ± 1.66 × 10° | 2.97 × 10−3 ± 4.00 × 10−3 | 6.35 × 10−8 ± 2.26 × 10−8 | 9.63 × 10° ± 5.33 × 10° |
| 25 | 3.12 × 10° ± 1.61 × 10° | 8.07 × 10−4 ± 2.26 × 10−3 | 3.29 × 10−7 ± 1.52 × 10−7 | 1.91 × 101 ± 2.95 × 101 |
| 30 | 3.01 × 10° ± 1.63 × 10° | 1.41 × 10−3 ± 3.09 × 10−3 | 1.92 × 10−8 ± 4.51 × 10−7 | 3.10 × 10° ± 1.54 × 10° |
Figure 8.(a) Effect of SF on multimodal functions; (b) Effect of β on multimodal functions.
Figure 9.(a) Adjustment the search step; (b) Adjustment the calculation of transition probability.
Figure 10.Flowchart of simulation experiment.
Figure 11.(a) Convergence curves for single point search; (b) Matching results for single point search.
Figure 12.The distribution of the gravity anomaly for different matching sequences.
Figure 13.(a) Convergence curves for single point search; (b) Matching results for single point search.
Figure 14.Screening for best matching result by Hausdorff distance.
Figure 15.(a) Distributions of gravity anomaly; (b) Comparison of results for different search strategies.
Figure 16.FOG-INS and PHINS.
The main parameters of inertial components for FOG-INS.
| Bias stability | 0.01 (°)/h | 5 × 10−5 g |
| Random walk | ≤0.002 (°)/h | ≤1 × 10−5 g |
The navigation accuracy of different modes for PHINS.
| Position | 0.6 nm/h | 5 ∼ 15 m |
| Speed | 0.1 m/s |
Figure 17.Chekan-AM marine gravimeter.
The main parameters of Chekan-AM marine gravimeter.
| 10 | 0.01 mGal | ±1 mGal | 3 mGal/day |
Figure 18.(a) True navigation trajectory indicated by PHINS; (b) Gravity anomalies from gravimeter and FOG-INS.
Figure 19.The results of gravity matching in ocean experiment.
Positioning error of gravity matching navigation in the ocean experiment.
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before the matching | 3860.5 m | 1089.4 m | −389.6 m | 34.5 m |
| After the matching(standard) | 621.8 m | 264.4 m | −300.6 m | 14.4 m |
| After the matching(improved) | 13.7 m | 47.6 m | −222.7 m | 10.0 m |