A Hopular based weighting scheme for improving kinematic GNSS positioning in deep urban canyon

Abstract

Abstract Global navigation satellite system (GNSS) positioning performance in the urban dense environment experiences significant deterioration due to frequent non-line-of-sight (NLOS) and multipath errors. An accurate weighting scheme is critical for positioning, especially in urban environment. Traditional methods for determining the weights of observations typically rely on the carrier-to-noise density ratio (C/N0) and the elevations from satellites to receivers. Nevertheless, the performance of these methods is degraded in the dense urban settings, as C/N0 and elevation measurements fail to fully capture the intricacies of NLOS and multipath errors. In this paper, a novel GNSS observations weighting scheme based on Hopular GNSS signal classifier, which can accurately identify the LOS/NLOS signals using medium-sized training dataset, is proposed to improve the urban kinematic navigation solution in real-time kinematic positioning mode. Four GNSS features: C/N0, time-differenced code-minus-carrier, loss of lock indicator and satellite’s elevation, are employed in the training of the Hopular based signal classifier. The performance of the new method is validated using two urban kinematic datasets collected by a U-blox F9P receiver with a low-cost antenna, in downtown Calgary. For the first testing dataset, the results show that the Hopular based weighting scheme outperforms the three most commonly used GNSS observations weighting schemes: C/N0, elevation, and a combined C/N0-elevation approach. Approximately 10.089 m of horizontal root-mean-squared (RMS) positioning error and 12.592 m of vertical RMS error are achieved using the proposed method; with improvements of 78.83%, 46.82% and 43.27% on horizontal positioning accuracy and 54.00%, 47.51% and 49.69% on vertical positioning accuracy, compared to using C/N0, elevation and C/N0-elevation combined weighting schemes, respectively. For the second testing dataset, a similar performance is achieved with nearly 11.631 m of horizontal RMS error and 10.158 m of vertical RMS error; improvements of 64.58%, 32.90% and 22.40% on horizontal positioning accuracy and 71.99%, 65.24% and 55.88% on vertical positioning accuracy are achieved, compared to using C/N0, elevation and C/N0-elevation combined weighting schemes, respectively.