Two measurements from different sources - how to combine?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the challenge of combining two distance measurements obtained from different sources: a GPS/barometer system and a velocity-based integration method. Participants explore how to best estimate the overall distance given the uncertainties associated with each measurement, considering factors such as standard deviations and the correlation of errors.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes obtaining distance measurements from a GPS/barometer system with a standard deviation of about 2m and from a velocity system with a standard deviation of about 0.5 m/s, seeking guidance on how to combine these measurements.
  • Another participant suggests using a weighted average based on the inverse variances of the measurements, noting that GPS may provide a more accurate difference when points are close in space and time due to correlated uncertainties.
  • A participant questions the standard deviation of the distance derived from velocity integration, asking if it would be the standard deviation of velocity multiplied by the sample period, and whether the standard deviation of the distance from GPS measurements is equivalent to the standard deviation of the position given by GPS.
  • One participant emphasizes the context of the analysis, suggesting that the importance of accuracy may vary depending on the application, such as a routine report versus a critical expedition for sunken treasure.
  • Concerns are raised about the independence of errors in the measurements, with suggestions that for routine reports, errors could be assumed independent, while for critical applications, the correlation of errors should be investigated.
  • Another participant notes that the method of numerical integration used for velocity could affect the error in the distance estimate and questions how many velocity values were used in the integration.
  • There is a discussion about the definition of "best estimate" in mathematical statistics, with one participant mentioning the concept of a minimum variance unbiased estimator and the need to clarify what distance is being measured.
  • One participant highlights that if the velocity is not constant, the uncertainty in distance may grow slower than linearly, and suggests that the velocity measurement may be less precise compared to GPS data.
  • Another participant indicates that if the uncertainties are uncorrelated, the standard deviation of the distance could be calculated as sqrt(2) times the GPS uncertainty, but this would depend on the specifics of the system.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on how to combine the measurements and the implications of uncertainty, with no consensus reached on a definitive method or interpretation of the results. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to estimate the combined distance.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations regarding the assumptions of independence of errors, the method of integration used for velocity, and the definitions of distance and uncertainty in the context of the measurements.

9988776655
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
I can get a measurement of my distance between points (x1,y1,z1 and x2,y2,z2) by analysing position data from a GPS/barometer system, which has a standard deviation of about 2m for x y z positions. I can also analyse data from a system that provides velocity with a standard deviation of about 0.5 m/s for x y z velocities. I integrated the magnitude of the velocity values, obtained position and used this to find distance. Given that I have 2 values for distance, how should I combine them to report the best estimate?

I have not repeated the experiment. The object moved while the two devices outputted their measurements.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
9988776655 said:
how should I combine them to report the best estimate?
With a weighted average, where the weights are the inverse variances.

If your two points are not far away (both in space and time), GPS will give the difference much more accurate than the positions on their own because the uncertainties are highly correlated.
 
I don't know the standard deviation of the distance that I obtained after integrating velocity. I only know that the standard deviation for the velocity was 0.5 m/s. Would the standard deviation of the distance be the standard deviation of the velocity multiplied by the sample period? I numerically integrated the magnitude of velocity:
d(i) = d(i-1) + v(i)*dt
Where d is the distance, v is the the velocity and dt is he sample period. i is the sample index.
Is the standard deviation of the distance (obtained by finding the difference in two consecutive GPS positions) be equal to the standard deviation of the position given by the GPS?
 
How much time do you have to invest in this mathematical question? For example, it might be that you are writing a report than very few people will read carefully and those that do read it won't take any significant actions based on the techncial details. . Or it might be that the object is a sunken treasure and estimating cost of a multi-million dollar expedition to find it depends crucially on the "uncertainty" in the object's location.

9988776655 said:
I can get a measurement of my distance between points (x1,y1,z1 and x2,y2,z2) by analysing position data from a GPS/barometer system, which has a standard deviation of about 2m for x y z positions.

For a routine report, you could assume the errors are independent. For a sunken treasure, there might be papers written on how (x,yz) errors in GPS/barometer systems are correlated and those should be consulted

I can also analyse data from a system that provides velocity with a standard deviation of about 0.5 m/s for x y z velocities.

For a routine report, we could assume the velocity measurements are indpendent and identically distributed. For sunken treasure, we should look at how your x,y,z velocity data was generated. Often such data doesn't not come directly from 3 sensors, each measuring a particular coordinate direction. Instead it may come from other less direct measurements that are run through some algorithm to produce (x,y,z) data.

I integrated the magnitude of the velocity values, obtained position and used this to find distance.

It will be important to know how many velocity values were used in the integration. One would expect the estimate of total distance to be more subject to error when more measurements are involved. There are different ways to estimate integrals from discrete data. Some involve fitting polynomials to intervals of the data and then integrating the polynomials. What method did you use?

Given that I have 2 values for distance, how should I combine them to report the best estimate?

Unfortunately, there is no definition for "best estimate" in mathematical statistics. There are definitions for technical things like "minimum variance unbiased estimator". For a routine report, you can try to find the "minimum variance unbiased estimator" if it exists.

The meaning of "the distance" needs to be confirmed. Suppose the object starts its trip at the origin of the coordinate system. Are you interested in the standard deviation of the distance between the origin and the estimated final position ( that one distance, not the values of the x,y,z coordinates)? Or are you interested in the distance between the final estimated position and the actual final position of the object?

For sunken treasure, you need to consider the cost of making errors in estimates. For example, thinking of a flat earth, the (x,y) position of the treasure might be more critical to get right than the z of it, if the z is always the bottom of the ocean at (x,y).
 
9988776655 said:
I don't know the standard deviation of the distance that I obtained after integrating velocity. I only know that the standard deviation for the velocity was 0.5 m/s. Would the standard deviation of the distance be the standard deviation of the velocity multiplied by the sample period?
Only if you know the velocity is constant. Otherwise the uncertainty will grow slower than linearly.
What are typical velocities and distances in your setup? It looks like the velocity measurement will be very imprecise compared to the GPS data, then you can simply ignore it.

Is the standard deviation of the distance (obtained by finding the difference in two consecutive GPS positions) be equal to the standard deviation of the position given by the GPS?
It would be sqrt(2) times this value of the uncertainties would be uncorrelated, otherwise it will be smaller (differential GPS can get precisions of a centimeter). It would help to get some rough size of the system to see if that is a good assumption.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
11K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K