Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Some questions about system performance #155

Open
SakuraMemoryKnight opened this issue Apr 6, 2020 · 4 comments
Open

Some questions about system performance #155

SakuraMemoryKnight opened this issue Apr 6, 2020 · 4 comments

Comments

@SakuraMemoryKnight
Copy link

SakuraMemoryKnight commented Apr 6, 2020

I read some of the papers on slam, and I found that in these papers the performance of slam was usually evaluated with the average relative translation (%) and rotation (deg/m), It's just like the kitti list shows:
77239946-483b8b00-6c1b-11ea-8c01-f2276333e6ae
How to get this result?
In fact, I don't quite understand the meaning of these two evaluation indexes, so I don't know what the formula is for this parameter.
I have used evo to test the slam performance results, and can get ape and rpe, but these are not the above two evaluation parameters.
I just want to know what their formula is. Is it the absolute error of the final frame divided by the total distance?

@RuanJY
Copy link

RuanJY commented Mar 1, 2021

Just look at the text behind this table, there are information you need.
"our evaluation computes translational and rotational errors for all possible subsequences of length (100,...,800) meters. The evaluation table below ranks methods according to the average of those values, where errors are measured in percent (for translation) and in degrees per meter (for rotation). A more detailed comparison for different trajectory lengths and driving speeds can be found in the plots underneath"

@lgm051
Copy link

lgm051 commented Dec 9, 2021

I read some of the papers on slam, and I found that in these papers the performance of slam was usually evaluated with the average relative translation (%) and rotation (deg/m), It's just like the kitti list shows: 77239946-483b8b00-6c1b-11ea-8c01-f2276333e6ae How to get this result? In fact, I don't quite understand the meaning of these two evaluation indexes, so I don't know what the formula is for this parameter. I have used evo to test the slam performance results, and can get ape and rpe, but these are not the above two evaluation parameters. I just want to know what their formula is. Is it the absolute error of the final frame divided by the total distance?

Hi, brother, do you know how to use Evo to measure these two parameters of Kitti? Can you give me some advises?

@RuanJY
Copy link

RuanJY commented Dec 10, 2021

Read their README. btw, I use this one: https://github.com/LeoQLi/KITTI_odometry_evaluation_tool, it works ok.

@SakuraMemoryKnight
Copy link
Author

SakuraMemoryKnight commented Dec 31, 2021

I read some of the papers on slam, and I found that in these papers the performance of slam was usually evaluated with the average relative translation (%) and rotation (deg/m), It's just like the kitti list shows: 77239946-483b8b00-6c1b-11ea-8c01-f2276333e6ae How to get this result? In fact, I don't quite understand the meaning of these two evaluation indexes, so I don't know what the formula is for this parameter. I have used evo to test the slam performance results, and can get ape and rpe, but these are not the above two evaluation parameters. I just want to know what their formula is. Is it the absolute error of the final frame divided by the total distance?

Hi, brother, do you know how to use Evo to measure these two parameters of Kitti? Can you give me some advises?

No, I just get rpe,ape,rte,ate with the EVO, but I wrote and calculated the average translation error and rotation error of the first 800 meters according to Kitti's instructions.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants