Draft
Conversation
Member
|
Just coming up for water :-) |
Author
|
Hello! As described in #1638 the issue seems to occur when the states to marginalize occur not at the front of the frontal variables. For example: Note the row It would be great if you can give me a hint/example how I can reproduce this tree for a unit test. Since I used this fix I never had marginalization key issues anymore on my odometry setup. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR fixes the issue where the
IncrementalFixedLagSmootherfails to marginalize a key that is located in the middle of the tree as described here: #1638I'm open for suggestions on how to write a unit test for this problem.
Please also let me know, if