You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This is the right place for these questions, thanks for your interest in the project !
So in the paper, we implemented the LoopClosure in pyLidar-SLAM.
Historically, pyLiDAR-SLAM was the main project where I could implement / benchmark SLAM algorithms,
We made a wrapper for CT-ICP in python and integrated it into pyLidar-SLAM.
Since then, (and really for time management of my PhD thesis), my focus has been on C++ code and ct_icp improvements.
So we are currently working on an implementation of the loop closure in C++ (with ROS support), as we found that it was more relevant in the short-term for most use-case of SLAM. It will probably appear in another gitlab project, but there will be pointers to it in this project. It should appear in the coming weeks (there is a working version which still needs some polishing).
In the mean time, you will find the LoopClosure implementation we used in our paper in pyLidarSLAM.
However our aim is (when I will have some time) to update the python wrapping to integrate ct-icp with pyLiDAR-SLAM, so we can use the neat parameter grid-search that comes with hydra.
So right now our SLAM (in this project) is really an odometry : ie correct locally, but no compensation for large trajectory errors.
I don't know whether this Github issue pages are right place for question...
I have read your paper
CT-ICP: Real-time Elastic LiDAR Odometry with Loop Closure
.I successfully have built your ct_icp code using KITTI dataset with viz3d
Here is my question
What is exactly the role of pyLiDAR-SLAM ?
The paper says that ct_icp is lidar-only odometry and has loop closure itself using g2o
Is it enough for SLAM to use ct_icp ?
I would appreciate it if you could answer my question...!
Best regards.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: