Thats just a consequence of sample rate as a whole. The entire linear control space is intricately tied to frequency domain, so you have to sample at a rate at least twice higher than your highest frequency event for accurate capture, as per Nyquist theorem.
All of that stuff is used in industry because a lot of regulation (for things like aircraft) basically requires your control laws to be linear so that you can prove stability.
In reality, when you get into non linear control, you can do a lot more stuff.
I did a research project in college where we had an autonomous underwater glider that could only get gps lock when it surfaced, and had to rely on shitty MEMS imu control under water. I actually proposed doing a neural network for control, but it got shot down because "neural nets are black boxes" lol.
True. I have often encountered motion controllers where the implementer failed to realize that calculating derived variables like acceleration from position and velocity using a direct derivative formula will violate the Nyquist condition, and therefore yields underperforming controllers or totally noisy signal inputs to them. You either need to adjust your sample or control loop rates, or run an appropriate estimator. Depending on the problem it can be something sophisticated like an LQR/KF, or even in some cases a simple alpha-beta-gamma filter (poor version of a predictor-corrector process) can be adequate.
I feel like people overcomplicate even the "simple" explanations like the OPs and this one.
Basically, a Kalman filter is part of a larger class of "estimators", which take the input data, and run additional processing on top of it to figure out the true measurement.
The very basic estimator a low pass filter is also an "estimator" - it rejects high frequency noise, and gives you essentially a moving average. But is a static filter that assumes that your process has noise of a certain frequency, and anything below that is actual changes in the measured variable.
You can make the estimator better. Say you have some idea of how the process variable should behave.For a very simple case, say you are measuring temperature, and you have a current measurement, and you know that change in temperature is related to current being put through a winding. You can capture that relationship in a model of the process, which runs along side the measurement of the actual temperature. Now you have the noisy temperature reading, the predicted reading (which acts like a mean), and you can compute the covariance of the noise, which then you can use to tune the parameter of low pass filter. So if your noise changes in frequency for some reason, the filter will adjust and take care of it.
The Kalman filter is an enhanced version of above, with the added feature of capturing correlation between process variables and using the measurement to update variables that are not directly measurement. For example, if position and velocity are correlated, a refined measurement on the position from gps, will also correct a refined measurement on velocity even if you are not measuring velocity (since you are computing velocity based of an internal model)
The reason it can be kind of confusing is because it basically operates in the matrix linear space, by design to work with other tools that let you do further analysis. So with restriction to linear algebra, you have to assume gaussian noise profile, and estimate process dependence as a covariance measure.
But Kalman filter isnt the end/all be all for noise rejection. You can do any sort of estimation in non linear ways. For example, I designed an automated braking system for an aircraft that tracks a certain brake force command, by commanding a servo to basically press on a brake pedal. Instead of a Kalman filter, I basically ran tests on the system and got a 4d map of (position, pressure, servo_velocity)-> new_pressure, which then I inverted to get the required velocity for target new pressure. So the process estimation was basically commanding the servo to move at a certain speed, getting the pressure, then using position, existing pressure, and pressure error to compute a new velocity, and so on.
When doing Kalman filters, you usually have the basic form of the dynamics in the linear system, but the coefficients are usually determined experimentally (since things like mass is hard to estimate)
Additionaly, because i have direct integrator control (i.e when my target is at setpoint, my control input is 0), all I need is a proportional gain that is small enough for the system to not go unstable. And i have a physical low pass filter of the motor rotor inertia.
When it lands. Auto brakes apply to the wheels to target a specific deceleration target. You don’t want to brake too hard and cause undue wear and you don’t want to under brake and miss your taxiway or go off the runway.
Gosh I should have thought of auto-braking. For some reason I kept thinking this was some fancy drone-braking system and couldn't figure out how you'd brake in the air... I never even considered the on-the-ground case. Thanks.
Nvidia 6xxx series, which was the first card to support SLI. I remember my gaming pc in college with 6x series card, and being able to get another card and use and SLI bridge that increased performance in some games.
Nvidia GeForce 900 series, which had the Titan with 12gb, first card iirc to able to support larger resolution gaming.
Nvidia RXT series which started with 20xx i think, first card to come with 24gb of ram.
And then the modern 4xxx series which used to fry power cables.
This is definitely out of the blue in terms of the person behind it. Its a cool concept as well (basically compressing meaning using language only).
That being said, can't help but wonder if stuff like this is better done with auto-encoders. The implementation in dialect.py seems very "narrative" oriented, probably not that good for things like coding.
As someone from Europe, to me the democrats don’t seem to particularly care about poor people either. They apparently do a slightly better job than the republicans, but that’s not a very high bar.
Also from outside the US, and the Democrats, the party itself that is not its supporters, are a bunch of human no-ops voted for by people who have no other choice than to vote for them because the alternative would be to vote for Trump. I read some stats somewhere saying that 80% of Democrat voters opposed the genocide in Gaza while the Democrat leadership were quite OK with it. This is a party that's completely out of touch with its own supporters, run as a sinecure for the leadership and little else.
If, on the day of Trump's inauguration, you'd replaced the entire Democrat leadership with a string puppet, would anyone have noticed the difference?
Firstly, the Democrats have done way more to actually help the poor people. Just under Bidens term, expansion of the child tax credit has been a huge help, and the infrastructure bill creates a whole lot of jobs.
Secondly, just know that your "centrist" position mask no longer works to hide your right wing views. You aren't fooling anyone when you compare democrats to a literal pedophiles and say both are bad. Luckily though, the EU isn't a bunch of pussies, and people like you can get arrested for lying and spreading misinformation.
The problem is that there is a good amount of people who claim that they are on the left, but ideologically on the right, just like with all the people who did not vote for Kamala because of her stances on Israel. They basically want someone who is just like Trump that would carry out their version of ideal governance without giving a fuck if it destroys the country.
So its not about left vs right anymore, its about sanity vs insanity. You are either for returning to some level of normalcy, and understand that no matter what the Dems faults are, their worst policies or people are way way better than anything that the right has to offer, and criticizing them at this point on any of that is just pointless.
> Secondly, just know that your "centrist" position mask no longer works to hide your right wing views.
Not the person you are replying to, but as someone who is most definetly not right, or centre, I find the democrats very half hearted.
I don't think that you voting for the better of the two makes you right wing (you are limited by the options you have, and by the reality of the impact of your vote), but I do hope the next Democrat administration has the courage to just dictate through executive orders to give Medicade for all, etc, since they have the cover of the current adminstrations trying to create rules to make it all legal.
I really don't know if this is just a symptom of non understanding how bad the situation is. Just for reference, even at the best possible outcome of elections, your life is going to get dramatically harder over the next 10 years because of all the shit Trump did. Jobs are gonna disappear, your house value is going to go down, everything will be more expensive, and your options abroad will be MUCH more limited. No amount of policy is going to fix the seeded distrust that the world has against US, and thats not going to change anytime soon.
If we ever return to some normalcy, then we can have a discussion about the faults with Dems.
Because right now, this rhetoric is akin to being on a sinking ship, and your options are either to be torn apart by sharks in the water, or be on a lifeboat, and you are saying the lifeboat sucks because it doesn't have a sun shade.
Its funny to read these comments where people think that focus is something that they can attain.
Your secret weapon isnt the laptop. Your secret weapon is a combination of a) actually giving a fuck about what you are doing, and b) the vibe of the workspace that makes you enjoy doing what you are doing.
Focus comes from a reinforcement loop of happy hormones that come from doing what you are doing. You can't focus on things that you don't enjoy doing.
>but if you get a DisplayLink dongle it works perfectly.
LOL
Im currently typing this on a work issued Macbook thats about 2 years old at this point, and 40% of the time, when I plug in a cable, it decides it wants to turn on and turn off hdmi output in rapid succession.
I always use DisplayPort over USB-C DP-Alt (or Thunderbolt on some displays) and I literally never have a problem across various LG, Dell and Apple Studio Displays.
MacBook Pro M1 Pro or MacBook Pro M5
Sounds like something is really broken in your setup?
On the other hand, sleeping/waking Thunderbolt displays on my ThinkPad with Linux regularly leads to kernel panics, across several kernel versions.
M1 non-Pro could only support one external screen through TB, and I think it carried on through at least M2 Air. It would also frequently get my Dell screen into a weird hung state after suspending and attempting to reconnect, frequently requiring a power cycle of the screen (not even connecting a Linux laptop back to it got it fixed). At some point, it seems to have gotten fixed and I am not seeing it anymore.
Linux, however, has worked great ever since I got the USB-C DP Alt-mode screen back around 8 years ago with my Thinkpad X1 Carbons over the years. I do have trouble getting a stable 8K at 60Hz through it with Iris Xe (gen13), but that does not work with Macs either.
Linux did have issues with using different scaling factors on multiple connected screens, but I only ever used one monitor so it never bothered me.
On top of that, it still does support subpixel rendering, and you can even tune pixel layout (RGB, BGR...) for VA and OLED panels, so text never looks crappy or janky as it can on Macs with low DPI screens (eg. large 4k screens of 40"+, but noticeable even on 32" 4k).
Display over USB-C is very janky (as in very much depends on hardware in the display or the docking station that you use).
The only saving grace was that the Macbook has external HDMI which works flawlessly, just like it has been for the past decade on any laptop. But not all models of Macs have had external HDMI. My last one did not, and it was a piece of crap, that ended up also swelling the battery somehow.
Recent thinkpads are a bit of shit-tier laptops, and linux doesn’t help much (it’s not linux’s fault).
for personal use I gave up after almost twenty years of thinkpad+linux and got a MacBook neo. So far it’s been great, much much better than my shit-tier ryzen-based x13g1 with 8c/16t and 32gb RAM. (Edit: it’s also more reliable when driving my 34” 1440p external display).
I had used Linux since mid-1990s and gave it up for Apple Silicon. Not fighting my hardware/software has been great despite the diminution of Apple’s software stack.
The truth is, only small companies build good stuff. Once a company becomes big enough, the main product that it originally started on is the only good thing that is worth buying from them - all new ventures are bound to be shit, because you are never going to convince people to break out of status quo work patterns that work for the rest of the company.
The only exception to this has been Google, which seems to isolate the individual sectors a lot more and let them have more autonomy, with less focus on revenue.
Remember when DOGE tried to cut out the inefficiencies and failed miserably? The "inefficiencies" and "bloated budgets" are there for a reason.
If Elon ran this project "without bloat", there is probably a 70% chance that the vehicle would have exploded, much in the way of his Starship and early Falcon vehicles.
But that explosion would have cost one tenth the cost a single SLS launch and the next one would go a little further. And eventually you would be flying the most reliable rocket in history more frequently than any other rocket for one tenth the cost of the competition.
This works for getting things to LEO. This doesn't scale well as the distance increases. You can't keep launching shit to the moon, crashing it over and over, until you get it right.
reply