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

Negative scan values in axis X #1

Open
FrancoVigier opened this issue Oct 1, 2024 · 4 comments
Open

Negative scan values in axis X #1

FrancoVigier opened this issue Oct 1, 2024 · 4 comments

Comments

@FrancoVigier
Copy link

Hi!. For example in the Scan_for_MI_0009.txt in the mi_calib_data we have negative values in axis X. Is it normal?

@tbroed
Copy link

tbroed commented Oct 2, 2024

Please clarify which data you are referring to. (The modality and the exact file name and path)
I will then take a look at it.

Generally, we published the raw and unprocessed sensor data, which can include outliers and artifacts produced by the sensors.

@FrancoVigier
Copy link
Author

I read your paper carefully, we have the same LiDAR. As mentioned in the paper they use the calibrator:
http://robots.engin.umich.edu/publications/gpandey-2012a.pdf
According to your work they perform a M1 LiDAR calibration - TRI023S-CC, so it is a monocular calibration(As RGB camera, I use a RealSense435i).
I have some questions about calibration:

  1. The calibration data provided by http://robots.engin.umich.edu/publications/gpandey-2012a.pdf is approximately 20 scans. How many scans of the M1 did you use to calibrate?
  2. Did you experience NAN points in the scans you collected? How was your treatment? Did you filter them?
  3. In the photo of the M1 and the RBG camera shown in the MUSES paper I can see that they are mounted on the same level. Do the M1 and the RBG camera have any special angle of attack that they used when calibrating? Is it recommended that the M1 looks more to the ground plane to reduce the NAN points?
  4. The Pandey calibrator paper recommends to do the calibration indoors, did you do it indoors or outdoors?
  5. Were the data collected from M1 only NAN points filtered or did they have other preprocessing?
  6. Were the data collected from TRI023S-CC only dedistorted (and mask calculated) or did they have other preprocessing?
  7. Pandey uses the scale factor only to scale focal lengths, why is this? In the paper it is not clear
  8. Do we agree that the center of coordinates of the M1 LiDAR is its geometric center?
  9. The resolution of the Frame Camera you use is 1920 x 1080. What format did you use to pass the data to the calibrator? You used the .ppm format (we are talking about the calibrator's master-cfg parameters).
  10. The resolution of the Frame Camera you use is 1920 x 1080. What scale factor in X and Y did you use? scale_x scale_y parameters respectively.
  11. In the calibration data used by Pandey in his paper he uses a Ladybug3 with resolution 1616x616 with a scale_x:1 scale_y:0.5 factor (resulting in 1616x308). Did you with your 1920x1080 resolution use a scale factor that results in 1616x308?
    Great job, I find it very interesting :D Greetings from Argentina.

@timbroed
Copy link
Owner

Please have a look at our Technical Report, where we go into more depth regarding the calibration process.

@FrancoVigier
Copy link
Author

What parameters did you use from minimize(method=’SLSQP’)?

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