PixelRGBDDistribution: Additional tests on invalid RGBD values - #159
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
This PR includes some additional tests to make sure the behavior of the
logpdfmethod is what we expect when it receives invalid RGBD values ([-1., -1., -1., -1.]). Since the distribution is defined on the pixel level, it doesn't really expect the observed RGBD to be invalid, so when we use it to vmap over vertices, we need to handle the case where a vertex does not hit the image plane manually. I'm also updating the image kernel slightly to make sure that we can handle those corner cases.(note that this is different from the case where a pixel does not have an associated vertex, which can be handle natively in the pixel distribution)
Test Plan