You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The description of the nearly-constant turn rate model in here doesn't look right.
The expression of $F(x)$ here is a vector, not a matrix as implied by $F$. An appropriate $F$ matrix can be seen, e.g., on p. 16 in here, but a bit struggling with finding a good reference. Regardless, in the entries to this vector above, it should be $x_{pos}$, not just $x$ (and the same, respectively, for $y$). Finally, a bit surprised to see $q_{\omega}^2$ not scaled by the time interval, which seems contradictory to the SDE in the model's description that states $d\omega = q_\omega dt$.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
OK, found a semi-decent conference paper with Bar-Shalom among the authors, which exposes the $F$ and $Q$ matrices. Indeed, the element in $Q$ that describes the turn rate noise is time-dependent, which means that the following is brought into question, i.e., q**2 may need to be turned into dt * q**2:
The description of the nearly-constant turn rate model in here doesn't look right.
The expression of$F(x)$ here is a vector, not a matrix as implied by $F$ . An appropriate $F$ matrix can be seen, e.g., on p. 16 in here, but a bit struggling with finding a good reference. Regardless, in the entries to this vector above, it should be $x_{pos}$ , not just $x$ (and the same, respectively, for $y$ ). Finally, a bit surprised to see $q_{\omega}^2$ not scaled by the time interval, which seems contradictory to the SDE in the model's description that states $d\omega = q_\omega dt$ .
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: