codecov-commenter
commented
8 months ago Codecov Report
Attention: 1 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.
Comparison is base (
5035f8e) 0.95% compared to head (0df824c) 18.87%.
:exclamation: Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.
Additional details and impacted files
```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## tier4/universe #140 +/- ## =================================================== + Coverage 0.95% 18.87% +17.91% =================================================== Files 269 14 -255 Lines 20911 551 -20360 Branches 390 301 -89 =================================================== - Hits 200 104 -96 + Misses 20554 369 -20185 + Partials 157 78 -79 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/tier4/CalibrationTools/pull/140/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=tier4) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [differential](https://app.codecov.io/gh/tier4/CalibrationTools/pull/140/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=tier4) | `18.87% <0.00%> (?)` | | | [total](https://app.codecov.io/gh/tier4/CalibrationTools/pull/140/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=tier4) | `?` | | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=tier4#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more. | [Files](https://app.codecov.io/gh/tier4/CalibrationTools/pull/140?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=tier4) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [...ls/deviation\_estimator/src/deviation\_estimator.cpp](https://app.codecov.io/gh/tier4/CalibrationTools/pull/140?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=tier4#diff-bG9jYWxpemF0aW9uL2RldmlhdGlvbl9lc3RpbWF0aW9uX3Rvb2xzL2RldmlhdGlvbl9lc3RpbWF0b3Ivc3JjL2RldmlhdGlvbl9lc3RpbWF0b3IuY3Bw) | `7.52% <0.00%> (+0.11%)` | :arrow_up: | ... and [255 files with indirect coverage changes](https://app.codecov.io/gh/tier4/CalibrationTools/pull/140/indirect-changes?src=pr&el=tree-more&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=tier4):umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
Description
For IMU link standard deviation, we would like to use yaw standard deviation in base_link for all the three axes.
This is because the standard deviation estimation of x and y in base_link may not be accurate especially when the data contains a motion when the people are getting on/off the vehicle, which causes the vehicle to tilt in roll and pitch. In this case, we would like to use the standard deviation of yaw axis in base_link.
For instance, the original algorithm caused a very large standard deviation for stddevangular*, e.g. 0.9[rad/s], possible due to the tilting motion of the vehicle when the vehicle is stopped. With this PR, the estimated value is now around 0.006 [rad/s] for the same rosbag, which is closer to it's real standard deviation apparently from the plot.
Related links
None
Tests performed
Tested on our calibration data.
Notes for reviewers
None
Pre-review checklist for the PR author
The PR author must check the checkboxes below when creating the PR.
In-review checklist for the PR reviewers
The PR reviewers must check the checkboxes below before approval.
Post-review checklist for the PR author
The PR author must check the checkboxes below before merging.
After all checkboxes are checked, anyone who has write access can merge the PR.