Reputation
1,037
Next tag badge:
27/100 score
8/20 answers
Badges
7 22
Newest
 Necromancer
Impact
~29k people reached

Apr
21
awarded  Necromancer
Mar
4
revised Standard Notation for diagonal matrices
typo
Mar
4
revised Standard Notation for diagonal matrices
add missing link
Feb
17
answered Standard Notation for diagonal matrices
Feb
10
revised Finding the relative pose of a robot gripper
better wording
Feb
10
answered Finding the relative pose of a robot gripper
Feb
10
comment Numerical Algorithm for $n \times n$ Matrix Inverse
What are the properties of the matrices you are dealing with? Is it guaranteed to be invertible or are you looking for some kind of least-squares fit/pseudo-inverse? Is the matrix maybe positive definite? Do you really need the inverse or is the solution of a linear system $A x = b$ sufficient? This is a good overview of various approaches: eigen.tuxfamily.org/dox/…
Sep
24
comment What are advantages of quaternion over $3\times3$ rotator matrix for representing arbitrary rotation?
The formula for Rs is not showing. Could you post it again?
Sep
23
awarded  Popular Question
Sep
11
awarded  Yearling
Aug
15
answered What are advantages of quaternion over $3\times3$ rotator matrix for representing arbitrary rotation?
May
23
asked How is the second part of a dual number called?
Mar
10
awarded  Nice Answer
Dec
10
awarded  Caucus
Oct
20
comment Estimating the missing points of a 3D point cloud
I fear there is not enough information to provide an answer. How was point cloud generated in the first place? Uniformly sampled from a perfect 3d model? Or noisy measurements from a 3d sensor? Even if you don't have prior know of the original shape, you might have some knowledge of the smoothness or topology of the surface?
Sep
11
awarded  Yearling
Jul
2
awarded  Curious
Jun
7
answered Any name for a special matrix with only non-zero entry
May
29
comment Jacobian of exponential mapping in SO3/SE3
I think you are right, and the equation $\partial \frac{e_i(\omega)}{\partial \omega_k} = \exp(\omega)\cdot G_k$ is wrong. But why do you think: $e_i(\omega)=\exp(\omega)$ The comment you mentioned states $\partial \frac{\exp(\omega)}{\partial \omega_k} = \exp(\omega)\cdot G_k$, but not $\partial \frac{\exp(a_i\log(\exp(\omega)T))P_i-P_i^*}{\partial \omega_k} = \exp(\omega)\cdot G_k$.
Apr
11
awarded  Revival