Skip to content

Added Timestamp for each Moving Object. #546

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

ThomasNaderBMW
Copy link
Contributor

@ThomasNaderBMW ThomasNaderBMW commented Jun 30, 2021

Signed-off-by: Nader Thomas thomas.nader@bmw.de

Add a description

The simulation timestamp the calculated "base" parameters (especially "position") of the moving object apply to.
Background: The timestamps can differ between e.g. host vehicle, rest of the vehicle traffic and pedestrians (or other types), because they may be calculated in different modules. And even inside those groups the timestamps can differ if one part is calculated in one cycle and the rest in the following cycle out of performance reasons.
Usage: E.g. for extrapolation of the whole traffic in graphic engines.

Some questions to ask:
What is this change? What does it fix?
The groundTruth timestamp is too unspecific and not working for that use case.
Is this a bug fix or a feature? Does it break any existing functionality or force me to update to a new version?
No.
How has it been tested?
Yes and working. Tested by Christopher Kiwus.

Take this checklist as orientation for yourself, if this PR is ready for the Change Control Board:

  • My suggestion follows the style and contributors guidelines.
  • I have taken care about the documentation.
  • I have done the DCO signoff.
  • My changes generate no errors when passing CI tests.
  • I have successfully implemented and tested my fix/feature locally.
  • Appropriate reviewer(s) are assigned.

If you can’t check all of them, please explain why.
If all boxes are checked or commented and you have achieved at least one positive review, you can assign the label ReadyForCCBReview!

Signed-off-by: Nader Thomas <thomas.nader@bmw.de>
@ThomasNaderBMW ThomasNaderBMW added this to the V3.4.0 milestone Jun 30, 2021
@ThomasNaderBMW ThomasNaderBMW self-assigned this Jun 30, 2021
@ThomasNaderBMW ThomasNaderBMW added the ReadyForCCBReview Indicates that this MR is ready for a final review and merge by the CCB. label Jul 7, 2021
@stefancyliax
Copy link
Contributor

stefancyliax commented Jul 13, 2021

CCB 13.07.2021:
Should be talk about from an architectural standpoint. (@pmai)

--
To be discussed if an extrapolation mechanism is the right approach for ground truth. To be clarified by @ThomasNaderBMW.
ReadyForCCBReview removed.

@stefancyliax stefancyliax removed the ReadyForCCBReview Indicates that this MR is ready for a final review and merge by the CCB. label Jul 13, 2021
@stefancyliax
Copy link
Contributor

CCB Meeting 04.08.2021:

  • topic will be in clarification at BMW. Decision will be done on CCB 18.08.2021.

@ThomasNaderBMW ThomasNaderBMW added the ReadyForCCBReview Indicates that this MR is ready for a final review and merge by the CCB. label Aug 23, 2021
@ThomasNaderBMW
Copy link
Contributor Author

BMW internal discussion is done. We came to the conclusion that:

  • it is not state of the art that all ground truth data is calculated exactly at the point of time the ground truth timestamp suggests. The modules calculation the ego vehicle, pedestrians, bicycles and rest of traffic mostly have different cycle times and can be asynchronous
  • an extrapolation doesn't fix this as it is just an estimation how the vehicles could move and not the reality
    ==> So the ground truth timestamp is already now not showing the real data. For most applications it may still be accurate enough, but for the graphics engine use cases it is not. And that is why we need an additional timestamp of the calculation time.

Please give feedback @kmeids , @pmai , @stefancyliax
Having this in 3.4 would make things easier for us!

@stefancyliax
Copy link
Contributor

OSI CCB:

  • Change would be major impact in simulation quality. It can not be merged at this point. Topic is candidate for removal from 3.4.
  • Change would be breaking change that would only be possible in major release.
  • Overall timing and synchronization topics in OSI should be topic for 4.0 release.

@stefancyliax stefancyliax modified the milestones: V3.4.0, V4.0.0 Aug 25, 2021
@stefancyliax stefancyliax removed the ReadyForCCBReview Indicates that this MR is ready for a final review and merge by the CCB. label Sep 1, 2021
@stefancyliax stefancyliax modified the milestones: V4.0.0, V3.5.0 Nov 10, 2021
@ThomasNaderBMW
Copy link
Contributor Author

Won't be done atm.

@ThomasNaderBMW ThomasNaderBMW removed this from the V3.5.0 milestone Mar 16, 2022
@kmeids kmeids modified the milestones: V3.5.0, V4.0.0 Mar 16, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants