Organizations: State Key Laboratory of Industrial Control Technology, Institute of Cyber-Systems and Control, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China. · Hangzhou Guixing Intelligent Technology Co., Ltd., Hangzhou, China.
We present NeuRIO, a streaming neural estimator for anchor-free 6-DoF relative inertial odometry using only identified inter-robot bearings, ranges, and IMU measurements. NeuRIO canonicalizes measurements into gravity-aligned coordinates, represents robots as nodes and mutual observations as factors, and uses attention for spatial reasoning and GRUs for temporal modeling. As a graph network, NeuRIO applies shared node-wise and factor-wise operators throughout the network, enabling it to handle different team sizes and time-varying observation graphs. NeuRIO is trained on a simulator that couples various motion patterns, device-level sensor characteristics, and diverse, realistic modeled, and temporally persistent sensor corruptions. In this way, NeuRIO achieves zero-shot sim-to-real transfer. Across 24 real-world sequences, NeuRIO achieves 14.1cm position RMSE and 3.9∘ rotation RMSE. More importantly, NeuRIO demonstrates strong computational scalability, maintaining an update cost below 20ms with up to 400 robots in simulation, while optimization-based methods exceed 20ms at only 24 robots. Moreover, even trained on limited team sizes, NeuRIO transfers directly to unseen larger teams without architectural or parameter changes.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1: (a) Relative localization estimates neighboring robots’ 6-DoF poses in a moving reference robot’s frame from bearings, ranges, and inertial measurements. (b) Overall position RMSE versus the number of robots within 20ms ( 50Hz camera frames). See detailed configurations in Sec. VI-A (AnyAmber [ 5 ] excludes its MatchNet, and uses ground-truth as priors).
Fig. 2: Architecture of NeuRIO, which directly predicts relative poses from bearings, ranges, and IMU measurements.
Bearing
Base
Noise
Rotate about an isotropically sampled axis by a angle with σ0∼U(0.1,4.0)∘ , multiplied by a device-specific scale U(0.5,2.2) .
Field-of-view
Assign omnidirectional cameras with probability 0.25 , otherwise a half-angle U(60.0,115.0)∘ . Outside bearings are removed.
Occlusion
Remove bearings whose connecting segment intersects an obstacle.
Dropout
Missed
Independently miss up to 20% of candidates.
Flicker
Eligible links switch off with probability min(1,(1−p)/κ) and on with min(1,p/κ) , where κ∼U(0.5,2.0) frames and p∼U(0.30,0.95) .
Short blackout
Short outages have λ≤0.15s−1 and τ from 0.5 to 3.0s .
Long blackout
Long outages have λ≤0.01s−1 and τ from 8 to 60s .
TABLE I: Sensor configurations and failure processes.
Fig. 3: Visualization of LOS_1 , NLOS_1 , SDM_1 , HDM_1 , MRP_1 , and TEN_1 . The top row shows the ground-truth trajectories of the reference robot (red) and other robots (blue). The bottom row shows the error of NeuRIO’s predicted pose of device 1 with respect to the ground-truth (blue) and the predicted uncertainty (orange). The uncertainty is visualized as the predicted position RMS scale 3exp(sp) , where sp is the predicted position log variance.
Seq.
CREPES
CREPES-X
CT-RIO
AnyAmber
NeuRIO
Pretrained
Fine-tuned
Pretrained (GT prior)
Fine-tuned (GT prior)
LOS_1
6.4 / 2.1
6.3 / 1.9
5.7 / 1.9
failed
12.8 / 4.1
9.3 / 2.6
9.5 / 2.8
7.1 / 2.0
LOS_2
8.6 / 2.4
7.8 / 2.1
6.7 / 2.0
failed
10.6 / 3.0
9.6 / 2.6
9.0 / 2.2
8.6 / 2.3
LOS_3
8.5 / 2.8
6.9 / 2.1
6.1 / 2.1
failed
8.7 / 3.0
9.6 / 2.7
7.3 / 2.0
7.8 / 2.2
LOS_4
7.2 / 2.1
8.0 / 2.5
7.0 / 2.5
failed
13.8 / 4.4
9.9 / 2.9
10.6 / 2.9
8.5 / 2.8
NLOS_1
6.5 / 2.2
5.0 / 1.8
4.6 / 1.8
failed
13.9 / 69.7
9.7 / 2.3
7.0 / 1.8
6.7 / 2.5
TABLE II: Comparison over 24 real-world sequences (RMSE in cm / deg).
Fig. 4: Computational scalability and accuracy in simulation as the number of robots increases. (a) Mean computation time, with a 20ms reference corresponding to 50Hz sensing. AnyAmber uses published timings with MatchNet excluded (which is used for anonymous bearing association) [ 5 ] . (b) Position and rotation RMSE of the frozen network in simulation. Complete denotes a fully connected observation graph; otherwise, each target robot has min(d,n−1) observed neighbors.
Max number
LOS
NLOS
SDM
HDM
MRP
TEN
Overall
3 robots
16.6 / 3.6
26.4 / 6.2
10.5 / 4.7
45.9 / 7.0
57.6 / 17.5
58.4 / 10.0
35.9 / 8.2
5 robots
9.5 / 2.4
8.9 / 2.6
6.5 / 6.3
28.1 / 4.1
26.9 / 6.4
18.1 / 4.7
16.3 / 4.4
7 robots
8.6 / 2.4
7.8 / 2.4
6.1 / 5.3
25.1 / 4.1
22.0 / 5.5
14.6 / 3.9
14.0 / 3.9
10 robots
8.0 / 2.3
7.5 / 2.3
7.0 / 5.0
24.9 / 4.0
22.6 / 5.8
14.6 / 3.7
14.1 / 3.9
TABLE III: Generalization across training numbers (RMSE in cm / deg).
Spatial block
LOS
NLOS
SDM
HDM
MRP
TEN
Overall
GATv2
21.3 / 4.4
24.9 / 5.0
23.3 / 5.6
67.0 / 9.1
failed
87.4 / 8.3
56.3 / 8.3
GINE
12.4 / 2.9
13.4 / 3.3
13.5 / 6.5
47.7 / 7.2
44.9 / 8.9
50.1 / 6.5
30.3 / 5.9
GENConv
12.3 / 2.9
12.1 / 3.0
14.2 / 7.0
48.9 / 7.6
42.2 / 9.1
45.2 / 6.0
29.1 / 5.9
TransformerConv
10.9 / 2.6
10.8 / 2.8
12.2 / 5.9
41.2 / 5.9
39.6 / 8.1
39.5 / 5.4
25.7 / 5.1
ResGated
10.7 / 2.7
9.8 / 2.7
10.9 / 7.4
41.3 / 6.0
37.0 / 7.8
38.7 / 5.3
24.7 / 5.3
TokenGT
11.6 / 2.4
12.0 / 3.0
7.9 / 7.6
38.3 / 5.7
37.3 / 12.5
42.3 / 6.9
24.9 / 6.3
TABLE IV: Comparison of spatial blocks (RMSE in cm / deg).
Variant
LOS
NLOS
SDM
HDM
MRP
TEN
Overall
NeuRIO
8.0 / 2.3
7.5 / 2.3
7.0 / 5.0
24.9 / 4.0
22.6 / 5.8
14.6 / 3.7
14.1 / 3.9
w/o GC
9.6 / 3.4
9.3 / 3.1
6.9 / 3.6
33.5 / 5.0
30.3 / 12.4
19.0 / 4.1
18.1 / 5.3
w/o IE
9.0 / 2.4
8.5 / 2.6
6.2 / 3.3
24.5 / 4.3
27.2 / 7.7
22.8 / 4.9
16.4 / 4.2
w/o FNM
7.6 / 2.3
7.1 / 2.4
5.6 / 7.2
27.2 / 4.0
22.6 / 5.3
14.0 / 3.6
14.0 / 4.1
w/o FFM
8.6 / 2.4
7.7 / 2.4
6.1 / 4.7
24.8 / 4.0
22.2 / 5.4
15.6 / 4.2
14.2 / 3.9
w/o LNM
9.0 / 3.2
8.1 / 3.0
7.0 / 4.9
27.3 / 5.4
29.4 / 9.6
21.6 / 5.7
17.1 / 5.3
TABLE V: Backbone ablation results (RMSE in cm / deg).
Simulator
LOS
NLOS
SDM
HDM
MRP
TEN
Overall
Default
8.0 / 2.3
7.5 / 2.3
7.0 / 5.0
24.9 / 4.0
22.6 / 5.8
14.6 / 3.7
14.1 / 3.9
w/o Temp.
8.7 / 2.7
9.6 / 3.1
7.1 / 7.1
41.9 / 6.5
40.5 / 11.8
34.4 / 6.5
23.7 / 6.3
w/o CamD
8.9 / 2.4
10.1 / 3.0
10.2 / 8.3
44.4 / 6.3
30.5 / 7.3
18.3 / 4.7
20.4 / 5.3
w/o CamC
9.2 / 3.0
8.1 / 3.3
6.1 / 4.0
35.4 / 5.7
41.1 / 20.0
14.9 / 3.8
19.1 / 6.6
w/o UWBD
8.3 / 2.3
7.7 / 2.5
5.8 / 6.1
26.3 / 4.2
29.5 / 5.6
43.7 / 4.0
20.2 / 4.1
w/o UWBC
8.5 / 2.4
7.4 / 2.4
7.0 / 5.6
24.8 / 4.0
22.7 / 6.4
17.0 / 3.8
14.6 / 4.1
TABLE VI: Simulator ablation results (RMSE in cm / deg).
Neural inertial odometry has demonstrated strong potential for motion estimation in challenging environments, yet inertial-only preintegration remains sensitive to IMU bias and uncertainty. To this end, this paper introduces \textbf{PLATO}:\emph{Preintegration Learning from Accurate Trajectory Observations}, a likelihood-based framework that leverages accurate trajectory observations to jointly learn IMU bias dynamics modeled by a neural ordinary differential equation(NODE) and gyroscope and accelerometer noise covariances. Optimization exploits the sparse structure of the negative log-likelihood, with IMU noise-parameter gradients computed by forward differentiation. A tailored double-adjoint scheme couples a discrete invariant-error adjoint with a continuous-time adjoint for the bias NODE, enabling memory-efficient likelihood optimization over the nested bias-dynamics and IMU-preintegration rollouts. Validation on EuRoC shows improved performance, and underwater robot experiments demonstrate applicability under intermittent lighting failures and visual degradation.
Neural inertial odometry increasingly uses networks as learned measurements inside filtering pipelines. Such measurements should transform consistently under arbitrary IMU mounting conventions: their mean must transform as a vector, and their covariance must transform congruently as a second-order tensor. We present GINIO, a geometric SO(3)-equivariant interface for neural inertial odometry under arbitrary rotations of the IMU measurement frame. Given calibrated IMU windows, our framework predicts a motion measurement and uncertainty obeying these tensorial laws. To support efficient sensor-frame learning, we introduce Last-Frame Alignment (LFA), a deterministic preprocessing step that is provably equivalent to world-frame training for SO(3)-equivariant predictors. The connected estimator tracks sensor-local states such as IMU bias, separating nuisance estimation from the geometric law enforced by the learned measurement. We instantiate the same interface in filter-connected NIO, AirIO-style recurrent aerial prediction, EqNIO-style full-SO(3) canonicalization, and ResNet-style temporal backbones. On TLIO, GINIO achieves 2.018 m ID/SO(3) ATE while EqNIO degrades to 76.389 m, using 11.6x fewer FLOPs. On NanoBench, our AirIO-style instantiation improves ATE from 5.579 m to 1.430 m without external attitude input, and our ResNet-style instantiation reaches 0.581 m ATE versus 0.645 m for ResNet1D. On Fetch, GINIO empirically reduces unseen physical-remount ATE from 8.15 m to 0.50 m without retraining, demonstrating robustness beyond the exact coordinate-frame guarantee. For uncertainty, spectral covariance reduces covariance-equivariance error by over three orders of magnitude compared with a diagonal head.
Chankyo Kim, Minghan Zhu, Tzu-Yuan Lin +2
University of Michigan Ann Arbor, MI, United States
Classical leader-follower formation control suffers from single points of failure and error propagation, and relies on absolute localization sensors that are ill-suited for GPS-denied environments. We present a learned, vision-only estimator that maps each robot's monocular image, together with messages exchanged over a communication graph, directly to its 6-DoF relative pose. Its key ingredient is the implicit virtual leader (IVL): a non-physical reference frame at the team centroid, implicitly learned inside a Transformer-based graph neural network, so that estimation has no privileged node and needs no absolute localization. The estimator additionally reports well-calibrated aleatoric (heteroscedastic GNLL) uncertainty alongside epistemic (MC~Dropout) uncertainty, compared systematically across simulation and real-world test sets. Trained only in simulation, the estimator generalizes to unseen scenes, to larger unseen team sizes, and to an external real-world benchmark. It exhibits no single point of failure: removing any one robot costs at most 1.24× the median removal, and removing 71% of the communication links costs 1.77× in position error without retraining. Trained on real-robot data from a single platform, it transfers without modification to a heterogeneous team, estimating relative pose to 0.22,m and 1.6∘ on physical robots, where it drives closed-loop formation control.