Erdem, TanjuErcan, Ali Özer2015-10-232015-10-232015-021057-7149http://hdl.handle.net/10679/947https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2014.2380176Due to copyright restrictions, the access to the full text of this article is only available via subscription.In a setup where camera measurements are used to estimate 3D egomotion in an extended Kalman filter (EKF) framework, it is well-known that inertial sensors (i.e., accelerometers and gyroscopes) are especially useful when the camera undergoes fast motion. Inertial sensor data can be fused at the EKF with the camera measurements in either the correction stage (as measurement inputs) or the prediction stage (as control inputs). In general, only one type of inertial sensor is employed in the EKF in the literature, or when both are employed they are both fused in the same stage. In this paper, we provide an extensive performance comparison of every possible combination of fusing accelerometer and gyroscope data as control or measurement inputs using the same data set collected at different motion speeds. In particular, we compare the performances of different approaches based on 3D pose errors, in addition to camera reprojection errors commonly found in the literature, which provides further insight into the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches. We show using both simulated and real data that it is always better to fuse both sensors in the measurement stage and that in particular, accelerometer helps more with the 3D position tracking accuracy, whereas gyroscope helps more with the 3D orientation tracking accuracy. We also propose a simulated data generation method, which is beneficial for the design and validation of tracking algorithms involving both camera and inertial measurement unit measurements in general.engopenAccessarticle24253854800035455020000310.1109/TIP.2014.2380176Inertial sensor fusionExtended Kalman filter3D camera trackinginertial measurement unitAccelerometerGyroscope2-s2.0-84920972626