Differences between revisions 54 and 55
Revision 54 as of 2016-04-27 15:23:37
Size: 9180
Editor: DianeLambert
Comment:
Revision 55 as of 2016-04-27 15:36:46
Size: 9571
Editor: DianeLambert
Comment:
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 28: Line 28:

CompareOBJ RMSs (with and without translation/rotation) show no trend with the magnitude of S/C position and pointing perturbation within the perturbation ranges tested. Cross-correlation scores here. The accuracy of the evaluation model is therefore not dependent on the S/C position or camera pointing perturbation up to three standard deviations.
Line 100: Line 102:
== Cross Correlation Scores ==


TestF3G - Results

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 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 one-sigma:

  • VSO = 6.4m;
  • PTG = 0.217mrad.

Results for both data sets are presented herein.

Model shift

In the process of generating the 35cm Preliminary Shape Model a shift in the body center with respect to the inertial center occurred. 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 body-center shift was generated. One subtest was re-run 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 pointing perturbation within the perturbation ranges tested. Cross-correlation scores here. The accuracy of the evaluation model is therefore not dependent on 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) and model accuracy (as measured with CompareOBJ RMS) with respect to the magnitude of S/C position and pointing perturbation within the ranges tested, indicating that the SPC-driven modeling is immune to S/C position and pointing perturbation up to three standard deviations.

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 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.

In all cases, the final SPC-derived S/C position is within 8m of the true S/C position, but in only two cases is within 2m of the true S/C position. The actual distance from the true S/C position is not dependent on the initial perturbed position - for example in the 0.25 x sigma case, the SPC-derived S/C position (distance from truth: 1.6m to 6.9m) in most cases moves further away from the true S/C position than its initial position (distance from truth: 1.6m).

The final SPC-derived S/C positions appear to be clustered around an incorrect solution 2m-8m distant from the true S/C position.

CompareOBJ RMS

Three CompareOBJ RMS values 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.

The CompareOBJ RMS (for the final 5cm resolution 20m x 20m evaluation bigmap) does not appear to be affected by 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:

  • 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_VSO_1km_resized60pt.png

CompareOBJ_VSO_1sigma_resized60pt.png

CompareOBJ Optimal Translations:

Sub-Test

S/C Position Uncertainty

Perturbation Magnitude

RMS (cm)

Translation (cm)

Translated Distance (cm)

F3G7

1km

0.25 x sigma

15.7849

85.0698

62.3596

-14.3765

106.4532

F3G6

1km

0.50 x sigma

15.1147

84.5538

61.6624

-15.3434

105.7687

F3G5

1km

0.75 x sigma

14.3150

95.8438

59.9313

-21.6901

115.1011

F3G3

1km

1.00 x sigma

13.6399

106.4870

58.2162

-27.3527

124.4057

F3G4

1km

1.50 x sigma

15.8949

79.1224

63.2865

-19.6432

103.2056

F3G2

1km

2.00 x sigma

13.6938

110.1339

58.9454

-23.2403

127.0596

F3G1

1km

3.00 x sigma

14.6271

93.5937

61.6997

-26.8422

115.2698

Sub-Test

S/C Position Uncertainty

Perturbation Magnitude

RMS (cm)

Translation (cm)

Translated Distance (cm)

F3G7

6.4m

0.25 x sigma

15.9614

95.5555

66.8688

-17.6793

117.9613

F3G6

6.4m

0.50 x sigma

16.0260

93.7254

66.9687

-17.2331

116.4743

F3G5

6.4m

0.75 x sigma

16.4387

88.3626

69.0785

-12.1628

112.8172

F3G3

6.4m

1.00 x sigma

9.5449

167.5406

57.3951

-27.0780

179.1571

F3G4

6.4m

1.50 x sigma

16.0525

93.4737

70.0956

-15.0998

117.808=1

F3G2

6.4m

2.00 x sigma

16.1591

94.1139

69.1165

-19.95051

118.4514

F3G1

6.4m

3.00 x sigma

15.2938

101.8134

70.3467

-20.3179

125.4091

CompareOBJ Manual Translations:

Sub-Test

S/C Position Uncertainty

Perturbation Magnitude

RMS (cm)

Translation (cm)

Translated Distance (cm)

F3G7

1km

0.25 x sigma

8.0140

187.5

47.5

-30

195.74

F3G6

1km

0.50 x sigma

7.9343

187.5

47.5

-30

195.74

F3G5

1km

0.75 x sigma

7.9579

187.5

47.5

-30

195.74

F3G3

1km

1.00 x sigma

7.6749

187.5

47.5

-30

195.74

F3G4

1km

1.50 x sigma

7.9964

187.5

47.5

-40

197.52

F3G2

1km

2.00 x sigma

7.8591

187.5

47.5

-40

197.52

F3G1

1km

3.00 x sigma

7.6739

187.5

47.5

-50

209.19

Sub-Test

S/C Position Uncertainty

Perturbation Magnitude

RMS (cm)

Translation (cm)

Translated Distance (cm)

F3G7

6.4m

0.25 x sigma

8.4097

207.5

47.5

-30

214.9709

F3G6

6.4m

0.50 x sigma

8.3974

207.5

47.5

-30

214.9709

F3G5

6.4m

0.75 x sigma

8.5008

207.5

47.5

-30

214.9709

F3G3

6.4m

1.00 x sigma

8.2400

207.5

47.5

-40

216.5929

F3G4

6.4m

1.50 x sigma

8.5820

197.5

57.5

-20

206.6700

F3G2

6.4m

2.00 x sigma

8.4134

197.5

57.5

-30

207.8762

F3G1

6.4m

3.00 x sigma

7.9259

197.5

57.5

-30

207.8762

Cross Correlation Scores

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 down-selected due to their coverage of the 20m x 20m evaluation region, and their almost complete containment within the iterated 100m x 100m region.

vertices_all_resized.png

vertices_eval_resized.png

Distance SCOBJ(truth) to SCOBJ(solution)

The distance of the final SPC-derived S/C position from the true S/C position is plotted for the full Detailed Survey PolyCam image set for each magnitude of perturbation. The evaluation images are plotted in red.

3D graphs of final SPC-derived SCOBJ and true SCOBJ are then plotted for each picture. The first four are the down-selected evaluation pictures, the rest of the image set is included for comparison.

The pattern of final SPC-derived SCOBJ is broadly consistent across magnitudes of perturbation. The position correction is mostly a normal correction with lateral movement, bringing the modeled S/C position within an approx. 8m-radius sphere around the true position (or, in the case of perturbations<8m, pushing SCOBJ outwards up to 8m).

Evaluation Pictures

Example nominal SCOBJs:

P601293751G3_nominal_resized.png

Final solution SCOBJs:

Remaining Detailed Survey PolyCam Pictures

TestF3G - Results (last edited 2016-05-05 09:47:57 by DianeLambert)