Definitions
CompareOBJ RMS: 
The root mean square of the distance from each bigmap pixel/line location to the nearest facet of the truth OBJ. 
PTG: 
The formal camera pointing uncertainty. 
SCOBJ: 
The S/C position vector from the center of the asteroid. 
VSO: 
The formal SCOBJ uncertainty. 
Additional Tests
S/C Position and Camera Pointing Uncertainties
The Detailed Survey PolyCam F3G data set had large S/C position and pointing uncertainties, unsuitable for Detailed Survey Baseball Diamond trajectories:
 VSO = 1km;
 PTG = 1mrad.
An additional suite of tests was therefore run with a duplicate Detailed Survey PolyCam dataset with S/C position and pointing uncertainties set to onesigma:
 VSO = 6.4m;
 PTG = 0.217mrad.
Results for both data sets are presented herein.
Model CenterofBody Shift
In the process of generating the 35cm Preliminary Shape Model, a shift in the body center with respect to the inertial center was applied. The magnitude of the shift was approximately 2m. Since the final S/C position across F3G subtests lay in a region 2m to 8m from the true S/C position, the effect of the body center shift came into question. To investigate, an alternative 35cm Preliminary Shape Model with no bodycenter shift was generated. One subtest was rerun using the alternative start model.
Key Findings
CompareOBJ RMSs (with and without translation/rotation) show no trend with the magnitude of S/C position and camera pointing perturbation within the perturbation ranges tested. The correlation score also does not vary with the magnitude of S/C position and camera pointing perturbation and is approx. 0.76 giving a very good indication of correlation. The accuracy of the evaluation model is therefore invariant to the S/C position or camera pointing perturbation up to three standard deviations.
The results show no significant difference in the final S/C position (SCOBJ) with respect to the magnitude of S/C position and camera pointing perturbation within the ranges tested, indicating that the SPCdriven S/C position modeling is immune to S/C position and pointing perturbation up to three standard deviations.
With the large S/C position and camera pointing uncertainties, the final SPCderived S/C position is within 8m of the true S/C position, and in two cases is within 2m of the true S/C position. With the reduced (1 sigma) S/C position and camera pointing uncertainties, all the final SPCderived S/C positions are within 2m of the true S/C position. The distance between the final S/C position and the true S/C position is not dependent on the initial perturbed S/C position  indeed, in the 0.25 x sigma case, the SPCderived S/C position in most cases moves further away from the true S/C position (final distance from truth: 1.6m to 6.9m) than its initial position (initial distance from truth: 1.6m).
The final SPCderived S/C positions appear to be clustered around an incorrect solution 2m distant from the true S/C position (in the VSO=1sigma tests). This distance appears to correspond with a shift in the centerofbody which was applied during the generation of the 35cm Preliminary Survey Start Model. However, this finding persisted when a subtest was rerun with a 35cm Preliminary Survey Start Model which had not had a shift applied to the centerofbody. Measures of both model accuracy and S/C position did not vary with centerofbody shift.
Important Notes
It should be noted that S/C position perturbation was divided equally between the SCOBJ components, resulting in a distance from the truth position which was a multiple of the standard deviation of 6.4m. Therefore:
 maximum lateral perturbation was a multiple of 3.7m (6.4m/sqrt(3));
 maximum normal perturbation (wrt body center) was a multiple of 3.7m (6.4m/sqrt(3)).
It is assumed that the worst case scenario is a 3 x sigma (19.2m) lateral perturbation. The maximum possible lateral perturbation tested was 3 x 3.7m = 11.1m.
Results and Discussion
CompareOBJ RMS
Three CompareOBJ RMS values for the final 5cm resolution 20m x 20m evaluation bigmap are presented for each subtest and each S/C position and camera pointing uncertainty:
 The largest CompareOBJ RMS (approx. 65cm across subtests) is obtained by running CompareOBJ on the untranslated and unrotated evaluation model.
 The second smallest CompareOBJ RMS (approx. 15cm across subtests) is obtained by running CompareOBJ with its optimal translation and rotation option.
 The smallest CompareOBJ RMS (approx. 9cm across subtests) is obtained by manually translating the evaluation model and searching for a local CompareOBJ RMS minimum.
The CompareOBJ optimal translation routine is not optimized for the evaluation model scale (5cm pix/line resolution). Manual translations of the bigmap were therefore conducted in an attempt to find a minimum CompareOBJ RMS. The manually translated evaluation models gave the smallest CompareOBJ RMSs.
CompareOBJ RMSs do not show a trend with the magnitude of S/C position and pointing perturbation within the ranges tested.
CompareOBJ RMSs differ slightly with S/C position and camera pointing uncertainties, with smaller RMS values corresponding with lower uncertainties:
 approx. 5cm difference for CompareOBJ RMS without translation/rotation;
 approx. 2cm difference for CompareOBJ RMS with optimal translation and rotation;
 approx. 0.4cm difference for CompareOBJ RMS with manual translation.
CompareOBJ Optimal Translations:
SubTest 
S/C Position Uncertainty 
Perturbation Magnitude 
RMS (cm) 
Translation (cm) 
Translated Distance (cm) 

1km 
0.25 x sigma 
15.7849 
85.0698 
62.3596 
14.3765 
106.4532 

1km 
0.50 x sigma 
15.1147 
84.5538 
61.6624 
15.3434 
105.7687 

1km 
0.75 x sigma 
14.3150 
95.8438 
59.9313 
21.6901 
115.1011 

1km 
1.00 x sigma 
13.6399 
106.4870 
58.2162 
27.3527 
124.4057 

1km 
1.50 x sigma 
15.8949 
79.1224 
63.2865 
19.6432 
103.2056 

1km 
2.00 x sigma 
13.6938 
110.1339 
58.9454 
23.2403 
127.0596 

1km 
3.00 x sigma 
14.6271 
93.5937 
61.6997 
26.8422 
115.2698 
SubTest 
S/C Position Uncertainty 
Perturbation Magnitude 
RMS (cm) 
Translation (cm) 
Translated Distance (cm) 

6.4m 
0.25 x sigma 
15.9614 
95.5555 
66.8688 
17.6793 
117.9613 

6.4m 
0.50 x sigma 
16.0260 
93.7254 
66.9687 
17.2331 
116.4743 

6.4m 
0.75 x sigma 
16.4387 
88.3626 
69.0785 
12.1628 
112.8172 

6.4m 
1.00 x sigma 
9.5449 
167.5406 
57.3951 
27.0780 
179.1571 

6.4m 
1.50 x sigma 
16.0525 
93.4737 
70.0956 
15.0998 
117.808=1 

6.4m 
2.00 x sigma 
16.1591 
94.1139 
69.1165 
19.95051 
118.4514 

6.4m 
3.00 x sigma 
15.2938 
101.8134 
70.3467 
20.3179 
125.4091 
CompareOBJ Manual Translations:
SubTest 
S/C Position Uncertainty 
Perturbation Magnitude 
RMS (cm) 
Translation (cm) 
Translated Distance (cm) 

1km 
0.25 x sigma 
8.0140 
187.5 
47.5 
30 
195.74 

1km 
0.50 x sigma 
7.9343 
187.5 
47.5 
30 
195.74 

1km 
0.75 x sigma 
7.9579 
187.5 
47.5 
30 
195.74 

1km 
1.00 x sigma 
7.6749 
187.5 
47.5 
30 
195.74 

1km 
1.50 x sigma 
7.9964 
187.5 
47.5 
40 
197.52 

1km 
2.00 x sigma 
7.8591 
187.5 
47.5 
40 
197.52 

1km 
3.00 x sigma 
7.6739 
187.5 
47.5 
50 
209.19 
SubTest 
S/C Position Uncertainty 
Perturbation Magnitude 
RMS (cm) 
Translation (cm) 
Translated Distance (cm) 

6.4m 
0.25 x sigma 
8.4097 
207.5 
47.5 
30 
214.9709 

6.4m 
0.50 x sigma 
8.3974 
207.5 
47.5 
30 
214.9709 

6.4m 
0.75 x sigma 
8.5008 
207.5 
47.5 
30 
214.9709 

6.4m 
1.00 x sigma 
8.2400 
207.5 
47.5 
40 
216.5929 

6.4m 
1.50 x sigma 
8.5820 
197.5 
57.5 
20 
206.6700 

6.4m 
2.00 x sigma 
8.4134 
197.5 
57.5 
30 
207.8762 

6.4m 
3.00 x sigma 
7.9259 
197.5 
57.5 
30 
207.8762 
Normalized Cross Correlation Scores
The evaluation maps were compared with a truth map via a crosscorrelation routine which derives a correlation score. As a guide the following scores show perfect and excellent correlations:
 A map crosscorrelated with itself will give a correlation score of approx. 1.0;
 Different sized maps sampled from the same truth (for example a 1,100 x 1,100 5cm sample map and a 1,000 x 1,000 5cm sample map) give a correlation score of approx. 0.8.
The correlation scores show no trend with S/C position and camera pointing perturbation in the perturbationrange tested. The correlation scores also do not differ with S/C position and camera pointing uncertainties. The correlation score across subtests is approx. 0.76 giving a very good indication of correlation.
Correlation Scores:
SubTest 
S/C Position Uncertainty 
Perturbation Magnitude 
Correlation Score 
1km 
0.25 x sigma 
0.7619 

1km 
0.50 x sigma 
0.7625 

1km 
0.75 x sigma 
0.7617 

1km 
1.00 x sigma 
0.7641 

1km 
1.50 x sigma 
0.7684 

1km 
2.00 x sigma 
0.7537 

1km 
3.00 x sigma 
0.7679 
SubTest 
S/C Position Uncertainty 
Perturbation Magnitude 
Correlation Score 
6.4m 
0.25 x sigma 
0.7628 

6.4m 
0.50 x sigma 
0.7633 

6.4m 
0.75 x sigma 
0.7637 

6.4m 
1.00 x sigma 
0.7672 

6.4m 
1.50 x sigma 
0.7606 

6.4m 
2.00 x sigma 
0.7510 

6.4m 
3.00 x sigma 
0.7683 
Image Footprints
The first graph shows footprints for all Detailed Survey PolyCam pictures which were included in the model. The second graph shows the four pictures downselected for S/C position evaluation purposes due to their coverage of the 20m x 20m evaluation region, and their almost complete containment within the iterated 100m x 100m region.
Distance SCOBJ(truth) to SCOBJ(solution)
The distance of the final SPCderived S/C position from the true S/C position is plotted for the evaluation Detailed Survey PolyCam image set for each magnitude of perturbation. The distance of the final SCOBJ from the true S/C position is invariant with the perturbation to the initial SCOBJ within the perturbationrange tested. The range of distances across pictures does vary with S/C position uncertainty however, with:
 distances ranging from approx. 1m to 8m with VSO=1km;
 distances ranging from approx. 1m to 2m with VSO=6.4m (1 sigma).
SCOBJ
3D graphs of final SPCderived SCOBJ and true SCOBJ are plotted for each evaluation picture.
The pattern of final SPCderived SCOBJ is broadly consistent across magnitudes of initial S/C position perturbation. The position correction is mostly a normal correction with lateral movement, bringing the modeled S/C position within approx. 2m to 8m of the true S/C position. Note that the SCOBJs form a cluster which is offset from the truth indicating that the model is converging to a solution different to the truth.
Evaluation Pictures
Example nominal SCOBJs:
Final solution SCOBJs:
SCOBJ without centerofbody shift
3D graphs of final SPCderived SCOBJ and true SCOBJ are replotted for each evaluation picture, now including the single result from the additional subtest conducted from a 35cm Preliminary Survey Start Model with no centerofbody shift. The graphs show that the final SCOBJ is not affected by centerofbody shift up to 2m. This result also dispels the notion that the distance of the final SCOBJs from truth is connected to the centerofbody shift.