You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hello,
I am evaluating ROVIO algorithm in VIO mode. In the paper it is stated that in EuRoC MH_01 data they achieve 0.178m RMSE, and in V2_01 they achieve 0.064 m RMSE. Which alignment procedure are you using? I am using evo package and I achieve 0.213885 m RMSE for MH_01 and 0.103967 m RMSE for V2_01. Can you explain why I can not achieve the same results?
How I calculate RMSE:
I run the algorithm in VIO mode and save the map.
I open the maplab console, load the map and export the vertices using csv_export.
I convert the vertices.csv file into TUM format.
I use evo_ape euroc command with alignment (-a) and these are the results I get for MH_01:
APE w.r.t. translation part (m)
(with SE(3) Umeyama alignment)
max 0.987680
mean 0.178013
median 0.162161
min 0.006351
rmse 0.213885
sse 83.213396
std 0.118567
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hello,
I am evaluating ROVIO algorithm in VIO mode. In the paper it is stated that in EuRoC MH_01 data they achieve 0.178m RMSE, and in V2_01 they achieve 0.064 m RMSE. Which alignment procedure are you using? I am using evo package and I achieve 0.213885 m RMSE for MH_01 and 0.103967 m RMSE for V2_01. Can you explain why I can not achieve the same results?
How I calculate RMSE:
I run the algorithm in VIO mode and save the map.
I open the maplab console, load the map and export the vertices using csv_export.
I convert the vertices.csv file into TUM format.
I use evo_ape euroc command with alignment (-a) and these are the results I get for MH_01:
APE w.r.t. translation part (m)
(with SE(3) Umeyama alignment)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: