Amortized Approximate Map Recovery
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I want to implement Sparse Extended Information Filter Slam.I studied it from Probabilistic Robotics by Dr. Sebestian Thrun. I have some numerical doubt in chapter 12 page 321(Amortized Approximate Map Recovery) eq. (12.31,12.33,12.33).
I attached a picture of my doubt
Here $Omega$ is a sparse information matrix and Xi is a information vector and $mu$ is mean. $Omega$ define the link between two robot pose or a link between robot pose and landmark position.
I fail to understand how could I get eq. 12.32 from 12.31? I understand eq.12.33 which is partial derivative of $mu$. But again lost on this line which implies $Omegamu=Xi$. From eq. 12.33 how could we say that $Omegamu=Xi$?
If some one explain me the mathematical derivation of 12.6 Amortized Approximate Map Recovery from chapter 12 it is easy for me to implement the code portion.
probability probability-distributions partial-derivative numerical-optimization gaussian-elimination
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I want to implement Sparse Extended Information Filter Slam.I studied it from Probabilistic Robotics by Dr. Sebestian Thrun. I have some numerical doubt in chapter 12 page 321(Amortized Approximate Map Recovery) eq. (12.31,12.33,12.33).
I attached a picture of my doubt
Here $Omega$ is a sparse information matrix and Xi is a information vector and $mu$ is mean. $Omega$ define the link between two robot pose or a link between robot pose and landmark position.
I fail to understand how could I get eq. 12.32 from 12.31? I understand eq.12.33 which is partial derivative of $mu$. But again lost on this line which implies $Omegamu=Xi$. From eq. 12.33 how could we say that $Omegamu=Xi$?
If some one explain me the mathematical derivation of 12.6 Amortized Approximate Map Recovery from chapter 12 it is easy for me to implement the code portion.
probability probability-distributions partial-derivative numerical-optimization gaussian-elimination
I have no background on this topic so I do not know the model behind. From the material you posted, eq $(12.32)$ and $(12.31)$ are purely definition-type statement, and there is no logical deduction between them. Once you agreed with the derivative at the LHS of $(12.33)$, it is easy to see that it equals to $0$ if and only if $-Omegamu + xi = 0$, since the other factors, i.e. $eta$ and $expldots$ are non-zero.
– BGM
Sep 11 at 5:36
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I want to implement Sparse Extended Information Filter Slam.I studied it from Probabilistic Robotics by Dr. Sebestian Thrun. I have some numerical doubt in chapter 12 page 321(Amortized Approximate Map Recovery) eq. (12.31,12.33,12.33).
I attached a picture of my doubt
Here $Omega$ is a sparse information matrix and Xi is a information vector and $mu$ is mean. $Omega$ define the link between two robot pose or a link between robot pose and landmark position.
I fail to understand how could I get eq. 12.32 from 12.31? I understand eq.12.33 which is partial derivative of $mu$. But again lost on this line which implies $Omegamu=Xi$. From eq. 12.33 how could we say that $Omegamu=Xi$?
If some one explain me the mathematical derivation of 12.6 Amortized Approximate Map Recovery from chapter 12 it is easy for me to implement the code portion.
probability probability-distributions partial-derivative numerical-optimization gaussian-elimination
I want to implement Sparse Extended Information Filter Slam.I studied it from Probabilistic Robotics by Dr. Sebestian Thrun. I have some numerical doubt in chapter 12 page 321(Amortized Approximate Map Recovery) eq. (12.31,12.33,12.33).
I attached a picture of my doubt
Here $Omega$ is a sparse information matrix and Xi is a information vector and $mu$ is mean. $Omega$ define the link between two robot pose or a link between robot pose and landmark position.
I fail to understand how could I get eq. 12.32 from 12.31? I understand eq.12.33 which is partial derivative of $mu$. But again lost on this line which implies $Omegamu=Xi$. From eq. 12.33 how could we say that $Omegamu=Xi$?
If some one explain me the mathematical derivation of 12.6 Amortized Approximate Map Recovery from chapter 12 it is easy for me to implement the code portion.
probability probability-distributions partial-derivative numerical-optimization gaussian-elimination
probability probability-distributions partial-derivative numerical-optimization gaussian-elimination
asked Sep 11 at 2:29
Encipher
246
246
I have no background on this topic so I do not know the model behind. From the material you posted, eq $(12.32)$ and $(12.31)$ are purely definition-type statement, and there is no logical deduction between them. Once you agreed with the derivative at the LHS of $(12.33)$, it is easy to see that it equals to $0$ if and only if $-Omegamu + xi = 0$, since the other factors, i.e. $eta$ and $expldots$ are non-zero.
– BGM
Sep 11 at 5:36
add a comment |
I have no background on this topic so I do not know the model behind. From the material you posted, eq $(12.32)$ and $(12.31)$ are purely definition-type statement, and there is no logical deduction between them. Once you agreed with the derivative at the LHS of $(12.33)$, it is easy to see that it equals to $0$ if and only if $-Omegamu + xi = 0$, since the other factors, i.e. $eta$ and $expldots$ are non-zero.
– BGM
Sep 11 at 5:36
I have no background on this topic so I do not know the model behind. From the material you posted, eq $(12.32)$ and $(12.31)$ are purely definition-type statement, and there is no logical deduction between them. Once you agreed with the derivative at the LHS of $(12.33)$, it is easy to see that it equals to $0$ if and only if $-Omegamu + xi = 0$, since the other factors, i.e. $eta$ and $expldots$ are non-zero.
– BGM
Sep 11 at 5:36
I have no background on this topic so I do not know the model behind. From the material you posted, eq $(12.32)$ and $(12.31)$ are purely definition-type statement, and there is no logical deduction between them. Once you agreed with the derivative at the LHS of $(12.33)$, it is easy to see that it equals to $0$ if and only if $-Omegamu + xi = 0$, since the other factors, i.e. $eta$ and $expldots$ are non-zero.
– BGM
Sep 11 at 5:36
add a comment |
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2912665%2famortized-approximate-map-recovery%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
I have no background on this topic so I do not know the model behind. From the material you posted, eq $(12.32)$ and $(12.31)$ are purely definition-type statement, and there is no logical deduction between them. Once you agreed with the derivative at the LHS of $(12.33)$, it is easy to see that it equals to $0$ if and only if $-Omegamu + xi = 0$, since the other factors, i.e. $eta$ and $expldots$ are non-zero.
– BGM
Sep 11 at 5:36