Details

    • Type: Improvement Improvement
    • Status: Open
    • Priority: Major Major
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Fix Version/s: 4.0
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      • Extended Kalman Filter with user supplied transition functions
      • Unscented Kalman Filter
      • Rauch Tung Striebel Kalman Smoother
      • Ability to supply combinations of nonlinear and linear kalman filter
        setups, i.e. nonlinear unscented system transition with a linear
        measurment update

        Activity

        Hide
        Jens Kübler added a comment -

        Patch relative to math/trunk

        Show
        Jens Kübler added a comment - Patch relative to math/trunk
        Hide
        Gilles added a comment -

        This is quite a large contribution.
        As it implies design decisions (a.o. package and class naming), you should probably start a discussion (about code organization) on the "dev" ML.
        A good way to seed the discussion would be to provide more documentation (class Javadoc and "package-info" files, with links to papers available on the Web).

        Thanks!

        Show
        Gilles added a comment - This is quite a large contribution. As it implies design decisions (a.o. package and class naming), you should probably start a discussion (about code organization) on the "dev" ML. A good way to seed the discussion would be to provide more documentation (class Javadoc and "package-info" files, with links to papers available on the Web). Thanks!
        Hide
        Thomas Neidhart added a comment -

        Hi Jens,

        I now had some time to look at your contribution, which, in general is really great.
        There are several areas, as Gilles already pointed, which need more work, see my comments below:

        • there are lots of API changes, which means that we either have to wait for 4.0 to integrate
          or find a way to extend the existing API in a backwards compatible way
        • there are currently no tests attached, which would be a requirement for new features to be added
        • do you know how to configure checkstyle in your environment?
          we have a configuration file (see checkstyle.xml) for our usual coding style, and if patches conform to these rules it
          is much easier to integrate them, if you have any questions related to it, do not hesitate to ask
        • interface naming: we prefer not to use I prefix for interfaces
        • javadoc: it is required that any public/protected and classes have a proper javadoc to describe its use
        • java 6/7 features: as we still use Java 5 on source level, @Override annotations are not allowed for methods
          implementing an interface

        I will take a deeper look into the class hierarchy, but wanted to give you a quick feedback first.

        Thanks,

        Thomas

        Show
        Thomas Neidhart added a comment - Hi Jens, I now had some time to look at your contribution, which, in general is really great. There are several areas, as Gilles already pointed, which need more work, see my comments below: there are lots of API changes, which means that we either have to wait for 4.0 to integrate or find a way to extend the existing API in a backwards compatible way there are currently no tests attached, which would be a requirement for new features to be added do you know how to configure checkstyle in your environment? we have a configuration file (see checkstyle.xml) for our usual coding style, and if patches conform to these rules it is much easier to integrate them, if you have any questions related to it, do not hesitate to ask interface naming: we prefer not to use I prefix for interfaces javadoc: it is required that any public/protected and classes have a proper javadoc to describe its use java 6/7 features: as we still use Java 5 on source level, @Override annotations are not allowed for methods implementing an interface I will take a deeper look into the class hierarchy, but wanted to give you a quick feedback first. Thanks, Thomas
        Hide
        Jens Kübler added a comment -
        • I'm in no hurry for integration. I needed these filters and wanted to share them so 4.0 is ok for me as I keep local development branch for me.
        • I have some tests that are not production quality because I still need to play with filter parameters. When I'm confident the filters perform in the expected way, I could supply them as well. The Kalman-Smoother i.e. has still some bugs I recently discovered.
        • I set up checkstyle with the math checkstyle file but discovered that most of the api does not convey to it. So my question is how strictly is it enforced?
        • Interface renaming is not a problem
        • I guess there is a little bit more to do...
        • In my development branch, I switched compatibility back to 5 with no problems and removed the annotations.

        Thanks for the hints
        Jens

        Show
        Jens Kübler added a comment - I'm in no hurry for integration. I needed these filters and wanted to share them so 4.0 is ok for me as I keep local development branch for me. I have some tests that are not production quality because I still need to play with filter parameters. When I'm confident the filters perform in the expected way, I could supply them as well. The Kalman-Smoother i.e. has still some bugs I recently discovered. I set up checkstyle with the math checkstyle file but discovered that most of the api does not convey to it. So my question is how strictly is it enforced? Interface renaming is not a problem I guess there is a little bit more to do... In my development branch, I switched compatibility back to 5 with no problems and removed the annotations. Thanks for the hints Jens
        Hide
        Thomas Neidhart added a comment -

        ok great, regarding checkstyle: we do enforce it quite strictly, see http://commons.apache.org/math/checkstyle.html
        One mistake I did very often was to create the checkstyle configuration, but not activating it in the Main tab of the checkstyle settings panel in eclipse (in case you use the same).

        Show
        Thomas Neidhart added a comment - ok great, regarding checkstyle: we do enforce it quite strictly, see http://commons.apache.org/math/checkstyle.html One mistake I did very often was to create the checkstyle configuration, but not activating it in the Main tab of the checkstyle settings panel in eclipse (in case you use the same).

          People

          • Assignee:
            Unassigned
            Reporter:
            Jens Kübler
          • Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            2 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated:

              Development