Table 2 Performance measures on test track positioning for the different filtering techniques (VPS-NF, no filtering; HPE, 75%-quantile HPE as threshold; good p., good performance filter, i.e. only positions from good performing receiver clusters; bad p., bad performance filter, i.e. removing positions from bad performing clusters) and for YAPS positioning
From: Acoustic positioning in a reflective environment: going beyond point-by-point algorithms
| Â | VPS-NF | HPE | Good p. | Bad p. | YAPS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Test tracks | |||||
% positions kept | 100 | 71 | 49 | 62 | 193 |
% positions on land | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0 | 0.3 | 0.8 |
N positions on land | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 7 |
Min error (m) | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 |
Mean error (m) | 5.5 | 3.8 | 4.7 | 5.4 | 6.7 |
median error (m) | 1.9 | 1.5 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 3.1 |
95%-quantile error (m) | 24.4 | 20.8 | 23.3 | 26 | 26.5 |
99%-quantile error (m) | 45.5 | 42.9 | 40.5 | 45.2 | 38.5 |
Max error (m) | 107 | 48.2 | 46.3 | 48.2 | 47.2 |