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

New correspondence rejector (#940) #11

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Apr 19, 2013
Merged

New correspondence rejector (#940) #11

merged 4 commits into from
Apr 19, 2013

Conversation

andersgb1
Copy link
Contributor

Implementation of the proposed feature here: http://dev.pointclouds.org/issues/940

@aichim
Copy link
Member

aichim commented Mar 18, 2013

Awesome, Anders! Will have a look soon and merge / comment.

Cheers,
Alex

@andersgb1
Copy link
Contributor Author

Great, thanks Alex!

@ghost ghost assigned aichim Mar 28, 2013
@aichim
Copy link
Member

aichim commented Apr 19, 2013

Hi Anders,

I went through your code and did some minor beautifications. The problem is that when I tried running the unit tests, I get this (on a 64-bit Mac OS):

/Users/alex/Work/pointclouds/pcl_github/pcl/test/registration/test_correspondence_rejectors.cpp:149: Failure
The difference between precision and 1.0 is 0.3666666666666667, which exceeds 0.35, where
precision evaluates to 0.6333333333333333,
1.0 evaluates to 1, and
0.35 evaluates to 0.34999999999999998.

Not sure how bad it is.

Thanks,
Alex

@andersgb1
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ahh, I see. That's easily solved by changing line 149 in test_correspondence_rejectors from:

EXPECT_NEAR(precision, 1.0, 0.35);

to:

EXPECT_NEAR(precision, 1.0, 0.4);

The thresholds are purely constructed by the test case, so it's just a simple matter of varying machine precisions. Will you do it?

@aichim
Copy link
Member

aichim commented Apr 19, 2013

I can do it, sure, but isn't this going to be a problem for the functioning of the algorithm on different platforms?

@andersgb1
Copy link
Contributor Author

I can (almost) guarantee you it will not :) The precision problem lies in the thresholds that I calculate inside the test code. The algorithm outputs the same absolute (integer) number of correspondences after execution and should definitely not be affected.

@aichim aichim merged commit 883a3f6 into PointCloudLibrary:master Apr 19, 2013
@aichim
Copy link
Member

aichim commented Apr 19, 2013

Done, thanks Anders!

@andersgb1
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thank you, Alex!

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants