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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Updated scaling factors for proper geometric representation of uncertainty ellipses #1067

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Apr 12, 2022
Merged

Updated scaling factors for proper geometric representation of uncertainty ellipses #1067

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
d9a00de
Modified the scaling values for plotting uncertainty ellipses to prop…
magicbycalvin Jan 25, 2022
1b81776
Changed all instances of the Sigma value, k, to 5 for plotting the co…
magicbycalvin Jan 28, 2022
e524e28
Updated comments to reflect standard deviations instead of variances …
magicbycalvin Jan 28, 2022
df7fb47
Merge branch 'fix/ellipses' into develop
dellaert Apr 12, 2022
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Prev Previous commit
Next Next commit
Changed all instances of the Sigma value, k, to 5 for plotting the co… 
…variance ellipse.
  • Loading branch information
@magicbycalvin
magicbycalvin committed Jan 28, 2022
commit 1b817760dd10d2d08579f4021968eeda262f34c1
30 changes: 20 additions & 10 deletions python/gtsam/utils/plot.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -79,6 +79,8 @@ def plot_covariance_ellipse_3d(axes,
k = 3.527 corresponds to 1 std, 68.26% of all probability
k = 14.157 corresponds to 3 std, 99.74% of all probability
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do you have an online reference?

Copy link
Contributor

@senselessDev senselessDev Jan 26, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

With code from other comment:

pct_to_sigma(sigma_to_pct(1, 1), 3) ** 2 --> 3.5267403802617303
pct_to_sigma(sigma_to_pct(3, 1), 3) ** 2 --> 14.156413609126677

So seems about right if we want this behavior.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think these (3.5 and 14.1) should still be changed to standard deviation


We choose k = 5 which corresponds to 99.99846% of all probability in 3D

Args:
axes (matplotlib.axes.Axes): Matplotlib axes.
origin: The origin in the world frame.
Expand All @@ -88,7 +90,8 @@ def plot_covariance_ellipse_3d(axes,
n: Defines the granularity of the ellipse. Higher values indicate finer ellipses.
alpha: Transparency value for the plotted surface in the range [0, 1].
"""
k = np.sqrt(14.157)
# Sigma value corresponding to the covariance ellipse
k = 5
U, S, _ = np.linalg.svd(P)

radii = k * np.sqrt(S)
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -123,6 +126,8 @@ def plot_point2_on_axes(axes,
k = 2.296 corresponds to 1 std, 68.26% of all probability
k = 11.820 corresponds to 3 std, 99.74% of all probability
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

same


We choose k = 5 which corresponds to 99.99963% of all probability for 2D.

Args:
axes (matplotlib.axes.Axes): Matplotlib axes.
point: The point to be plotted.
Expand All @@ -133,15 +138,15 @@ def plot_point2_on_axes(axes,
if P is not None:
w, v = np.linalg.eig(P)

# Scaling value for the uncertainty ellipse, we multiply by 2 because
# matplotlib takes the diameter and not the radius of the major and
# minor axes of the ellipse.
k = 2*np.sqrt(11.820)
# Sigma value corresponding to the covariance ellipse
k = 5

angle = np.arctan2(v[1, 0], v[0, 0])
# We multiply k by 2 since k corresponds to the radius but Ellipse uses
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Wow. I guess we were looking at the wrong ellipses all that time!

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

On the bright side, your numbers would have still been correct!

The requested changes have been made. Please let me know if you need anything else.

Thanks!

# the diameter.
e1 = patches.Ellipse(point,
np.sqrt(w[0]) * k,
np.sqrt(w[1]) * k,
np.sqrt(w[0]) * 2 * k,
np.sqrt(w[1]) * 2 * k,
np.rad2deg(angle),
fill=False)
axes.add_patch(e1)
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -191,6 +196,8 @@ def plot_pose2_on_axes(axes,
k = 2.296 corresponds to 1 std, 68.26% of all probability
k = 11.820 corresponds to 3 std, 99.74% of all probability
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

same?


We choose k = 5 which corresponds to 99.99963% of all probability for 2D.

Args:
axes (matplotlib.axes.Axes): Matplotlib axes.
pose: The pose to be plotted.
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -218,12 +225,15 @@ def plot_pose2_on_axes(axes,

w, v = np.linalg.eig(gPp)

k = 2*np.sqrt(11.820)
# Sigma value corresponding to the covariance ellipse
k = 5

angle = np.arctan2(v[1, 0], v[0, 0])
# We multiply k by 2 since k corresponds to the radius but Ellipse uses
# the diameter.
e1 = patches.Ellipse(origin,
np.sqrt(w[0]) * k,
np.sqrt(w[1]) * k,
np.sqrt(w[0]) * 2 * k,
np.sqrt(w[1]) * 2 * k,
np.rad2deg(angle),
fill=False)
axes.add_patch(e1)
Expand Down