(no title)
edub | 2 years ago
I just searched Google for a comparison and found that EMA is as good as Kalman for "random walk plus noise" on a Stats Stack Exchange, and that a 2003 paper from Brown University (Joseph J. LaViola) showed that a Double Exponential Smoothing algorithm is of equal quality to Kalman (and extended Kalman) but 135 times faster, and a simpler approach.
I find Double Exponential Smoothing to be much easier to understand than Kalman, and assuming the LaViola paper is correct, I'm not going to put additional effort into understanding Kalman.
No comments yet.