Benchmark for Nesterov-accelerated GJK vs. GJK timings [WIP] #320
+420
−7
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Quick benchmark that allows to compare the timings of Nesterov-accelerated GJK against GJK.
The goal is to see the results over multiple pairs and multiple random poses between each pair. It is also important to divide the results based on the distance between the shapes as Nesterov-accelerated GJK improves upon GJK when the problem is harder to solve for GJK (shapes in close-proximity/overlapping).
I created a dir
benchmark/meshes
where I put meshes from the panda robot found in example-robot-data (bothcollision
andvisual
meshes. I took the first 3 links of panda and its end-effector.Is it ok to do so?
If not, is it ok to add example-robot-data as an optional dependency which would be needed for this benchmark? In any case, I think having a set of robot meshes in HPPFCL is a good idea as it can be reused for other benchmarks/tests.
This is still a work in progress, the code needs to be cleaned/improved. I still need to loop through all the shapes for example, but I want to be sure how to add the meshes to hppfcl first.