← Back ←
This document is split into several sections:
In the previous document we assumed that the best linear estimate for the state, xj, was given by
The question to be answered is: Can we prove that the second statement is true?
If we want to estimate the state we can use only the three quantities that we know, the previous estimate, the current input and the current measured output. We use these three variables to form a linear estimate of the state:
where aj and bj are two unknowns to be chosen to minimize the error between the value of the stat and its estimate. In other words we want to minimize the expected value of the error ej with respect to the variables aj and bj.
To do the minimization with respect to each variable we simply differentiate and set the result to zero. At this point we will only try to fin
which can be rewritten
These last two expressions are often referred to as the orthogonality conditions; i.e., the error is orthogonal to the previous estimated state, the current input and the current value of the measured output.
Let's use the first condition to find an expression for aj that minimizes the expected value of the error. If we add and subtract ajxj-1 from the equation (why we do this will become clear shortly), we get:
Now we can use the facts that
Note that because of the orthogonality relationships the first term on the right can be rewritten as
We also know that the previous estimate is uncorrelated with the current value of the measurement noise:
So we can simplify the equation to the following
This is a complicated expression that we can use a bit later, but first we need to derive one more expression. By following the same sequence of steps as is done above (but starting with the second equation in which we set the derivative to zero), it is easily shown that
We can rewrite the last two equations
or, in matrix form
For a matrix equation
we know that either
So for the matrix equation above, either
The second equation can be written as
If the last equation is true, it should be true for any input. If the input is a constant such that uj=c, then
is only true if M and N are independent, and the value of the state and its estimate are not independent, so the first condition must be true. In other words,
(This last argument seems weak to me, but I haven't worked out the details. If you have a more rigorous argument, please email me.)
Substituting this into our original equation for the estimate of x, we get
Now recall Equation 6 from the previous document
From the previous document we know that the a priori estimate of the state is given by
and if we let
we can rewrite our last equation (at the end of the previous section)
which matches Equation 6.
We have shown that the Kalman filter represents the optimal linear filter. The other document goes on to derive the optimal value for kj.
← Back ←