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
The current implementation of ImpedanceController utilizes null space based on SR-Inverse.
I'm wondering whether null space should be spanned using an SR-inverse ( $J^{\sharp}$ ) or a simple pseudo-inverse ( $J^{+}$ ).
$$
dq = J^{\sharp}dx + (I-J^{\sharp}J)z
$$
$$
Jdq = JJ^{\sharp}dx + J(I-J^{\sharp}J)z
$$
The second term should be 0 according to the definition of null space.
However, If $J^{\sharp}$ is an SR-inverse, $J(I-J^{\sharp}J)z$ cannot be 0 because of the damping factor.
Instead of $J^{\sharp}$, if we modify the second term with $J^{+}$ like the following, the second term can be 0.
$$
dq = J^{\sharp}dx + (I-J^{+}J)z
$$
$$
Jdq = JJ^{\sharp}dx + J(I-J^{+}J)z
$$
I think null space should be computed using a simple pseudo-inverse. Is my understanding correct?
If we can use simple a pseudo inverse matrix for null space, the performance of convergence would be better.
The current implementation of ImpedanceController utilizes null space based on SR-Inverse.
I'm wondering whether null space should be spanned using an SR-inverse ($J^{\sharp}$ ) or a simple pseudo-inverse ( $J^{+}$ ).
The second term should be 0 according to the definition of null space.$J^{\sharp}$ is an SR-inverse, $J(I-J^{\sharp}J)z$ cannot be 0 because of the damping factor.$J^{\sharp}$ , if we modify the second term with $J^{+}$ like the following, the second term can be 0.
However, If
Instead of
I think null space should be computed using a simple pseudo-inverse. Is my understanding correct?
If we can use simple a pseudo inverse matrix for null space, the performance of convergence would be better.
CC: @k-okada
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: