- •Introduction
- •Linear State Space Estimation
- •Kalman Filter
- •Kalman Smoother
- •Demonstration: 2D CWPA-model
- •Nonlinear State Space Estimation
- •Extended Kalman Filter
- •Taylor Series Based Approximations
- •Linear Approximation
- •Quadratic Approximation
- •The Limitations of EKF
- •Extended Kalman smoother
- •Demonstration: Tracking a random sine signal
- •Unscented Kalman Filter
- •Unscented Transform
- •The Matrix Form of UT
- •Unscented Kalman Filter
- •Augmented UKF
- •Unscented Kalman Smoother
- •Gauss-Hermite Cubature Transformation
- •Gauss-Hermite Kalman Filter
- •Gauss-Hermite Kalman Smoother
- •Cubature Kalman Filter
- •Spherical-Radial Cubature Transformation
- •Spherical-Radial Cubature Kalman Filter
- •Spherical-Radial Cubature Kalman Smoother
- •Demonstration: Bearings Only Tracking
- •Demonstration: Reentry Vehicle Tracking
- •Multiple Model Systems
- •Linear Systems
- •Interacting Multiple Model Filter
- •Interacting Multiple Model Smoother
- •Demonstration: Tracking a Target with Simple Manouvers
- •Nonlinear Systems
- •Demonstration: Coordinated Turn Model
- •Demonstration: Bearings Only Tracking of a Manouvering Target
- •Functions in the Toolbox
- •Linear Kalman Filter
- •Extended Kalman Filter
- •Cubature Kalman Filter
- •Multiple Model Systems
- •IMM Models
- •EIMM Models
- •UIMM Models
- •Other Functions
- •Bibliography
CHAPTER 4. MULTIPLE MODEL SYSTEMS
Estimates produced by Kalman filter using the model 1.
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Measurement |
|
|
|
|
|
|
True trajectory |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Filtered |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Smoothed |
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
−5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
−10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
−25 |
−20 |
−15 |
−10 |
−5 |
0 |
5 |
Figure 4.1: Tracking results of Kalman filter and smoother with model 1 in Tracking a Target with Simple Manouvers example.
The illustrate the performance differences between different models we have listed the MSE errors of position estimates for each model in the table 4.1. From these it can be seen that the estimates of Kalman filter with model 1 are clearly much worse than with model 2 or with the IMM filter. On the otherhand, the difference between the KF with model 2 and the IMM filter is smaller, but still significant in the favor of IMM. This is most likely due to fact that model 2 is more flexible than model 1, so model 2 is better in the regions of model 1 than model 1 in the regions of model 2. The bad performance of the model 1 can be seen especially during the manouvers. The IMM filter combines the properties of both models in a suitable way, so it gives the best overall performance. The effect of smoothing to tracking accuracy is similar with all models.
4.2Nonlinear Systems
The non-linear versions of IMM filter and smoother reviewed in previous section can be obtained simply by replacing the Kalman filter prediction and update steps (in eqs. (4.7), (4.7), (4.23) and (4.27)) by their extended Kalmam filter or unscented Kalman filter counterparts, which were reviewed in sections 2.2.2 and 2.2.6. These algorithms are commonly referred as IMM-EKF and IMM-UKF. Naturally this approach introduces some error to estimates of already suboptimal IMM, but can
75
CHAPTER 4. MULTIPLE MODEL SYSTEMS
Estimates produced by Kalman filter using the model 2.
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Measurement |
|
|
|
|
|
|
True trajectory |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Filtered |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Smoothed |
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
−5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
−10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
−25 |
−20 |
−15 |
−10 |
−5 |
0 |
5 |
Figure 4.2: Tracking results of Kalman filter and smoother with model 2 in Tracking a Target with Simple Manouvers example.
Method |
MSE |
KF1 |
0.1554 |
KS1 |
0.0314 |
KF2 |
0.0317 |
KS2 |
0.0071 |
IMM |
0.0229 |
IMMS |
0.0057 |
Table 4.1: Average MSEs of estimating the position in Tracking a Target with Simple Manouvers example over 1000 Monte Carlo runs.
76
CHAPTER 4. MULTIPLE MODEL SYSTEMS
Estimates produced by IMM−filter.
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Measurement |
|
|
|
|
|
|
True trajectory |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Filtered |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Smoothed |
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
−5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
−10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
−25 |
−20 |
−15 |
−10 |
−5 |
0 |
5 |
Figure 4.3: Tracking results of IMM filter and smoother in Tracking a Target with Simple Manouvers example.
77
CHAPTER 4. MULTIPLE MODEL SYSTEMS
Probability of model 1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
True |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Filtered |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Smoothed |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
20 |
40 |
60 |
80 |
100 |
120 |
140 |
160 |
180 |
200 |
Figure 4.4: Filtered and smoothed probability of model 1 in each time step in Tracking a Target with Simple Manouvers example.
78
