Author here.

I recently updated the homepage of my Kalman Filter tutorial with a new example based on a simple radar tracking problem. The goal was to make the Kalman Filter understandable to anyone with basic knowledge of statistics and linear algebra, without requiring advanced mathematics.

The example starts with a radar measuring the distance to a moving object and gradually builds intuition around noisy measurements, prediction using a motion model, and how the Kalman Filter combines both. I also tried to keep the math minimal while still showing where the equations come from.

I would really appreciate feedback on clarity. Which parts are intuitive? Which parts are confusing? Is the math level appropriate?

If you have used Kalman Filters in practice, I would also be interested to hear whether this explanation aligns with your intuition.

I just glossed through for now so might have missed it, but it seemed you pulled the process noise matrix Q out of a hat. I guess it's explained properly in the book but would be nice with some justification for why the entries are what they are.

To keep the example focused and reasonably short, I treated Q matrix as given and concentrated on building intuition around prediction and update. But you're right that this can feel like it appears out of nowhere.

The derivation of the Q matrix is a separate topic and requires additional assumptions about the motion model and noise characteristics, which would have made the example significantly longer. I cover this topic in detail in the book.

I'll consider adding a brief explanation or reference to make that step clearer. Thanks for pointing this out.

Yeah I understand. I do think a brief explanation would help a lot though. As it sits it's not even entirely clear if the presented matrix is general or highly specific. I can easily see someone just use that as their Q matrix because that's what the Q matrix is, says so right there.

Firstly I think the clarity in general is good. The one piece I think you could do with explaining early on is which pieces of what you are describing are the model of the system and which pieces are the Kalman filter. I was following along as you built the markov model of the state matrix etc and then you called those equations the Kalman filter, but I didn't think we had built a Kalman filter yet.

Your early explanation of the filter (as a method for estimating the state of a system under uncertainty) was great but (unless I missed it) when you introduced the equations I wasn't clear that was the filter. I hope that makes sense.

You’re pointing out a real conceptual issue: where the system model ends and where the Kalman filter begins.

In Kalman filter theory there are two different components:

- The system model

- The Kalman filter (the algorithm)

The state transition and measurement equations belong to the system model. They describe the physics of the system and can vary from one application to another.

The Kalman filter is the algorithm that uses this model to estimate the current state and predict the future state.

I'll consider making that distinction more explicit when introducing the equations. Thanks for pointing this out.

You lead with "Moreover, it is an optimal algorithm that minimizes state estimation uncertainty." By the end of the tutorial I understood what this meant, but "optimal algorithm" is a vague term I am unfamiliar with (despite using Kalman Filters in my work). It might help to expand on the term briefly before diving into the math, since IIUC it's the key characteristic of the method.

That's a good point. "Optimal" in this context means that, under the standard assumptions (linear system, Gaussian noise, correct model), the Kalman Filter minimizes the estimation error covariance. In other words, it provides the minimum-variance estimate among all linear unbiased estimators.

You're right that the term can feel vague without that context. I’ll consider adding a short clarification earlier in the introduction to make this clearer before diving into the math. Thanks for the suggestion.

You could do a line extension of your product, like "Kalman Filter in Financial Markets" and sell additional copies :)

That's an interesting idea. The Kalman filter is definitely used in finance, often together with time-series models like ARMA. I've been thinking about writing something, although it's a bit outside my usual engineering focus.

The challenge would be to keep it intuitive and accessible without oversimplifying. Still, it could be an interesting direction to explore.

Here's my (hopefully) intuitive guide:

1. understand weighted least squares and how you can update an initial estimate (prior mean and variance) with a new measurement and its uncertainty (i.e. inverse variance weighted least squares)

2. this works because the true mean hasn't changed between measurements. What if it did?

3. KF uses a model of how the mean changes to predict what it should be now based on the past, including an inflation factor on the uncertainty since predictions aren't perfect

4. after the prediction, it becomes the same problem as (1) except you use the predicted values as the initial estimate

There are some details about the measurement matrix (when your measurement is a linear combination of the true value -- the state) and the Kalman gain, but these all come from the least squares formulation.

Least squares is the key and you can prove it's optimal under certain assumptions (e.g. Bayesian MMSE).

I really loved this one: https://www.bzarg.com/p/how-a-kalman-filter-works-in-picture...

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.

i liked how https://www.bzarg.com/p/how-a-kalman-filter-works-in-picture... uses color visualization to explain

That's a good article. I also like the visual approach there. My goal here was a bit different. I walk through a concrete radar example step by step, and use multiple examples throughout the tutorial to build intuition and highlight common pitfalls.

Kalman filters are very cool, but when applying them you've got to know that they're not magic. I struggled to apply Kalman Filters for a toy project about ten years ago, because the thing I didn't internalize is that Kalman filters excel at offsetting low-quality data by sampling at a higher rate. You can "retroactively" apply a Kalman filter to a dataset and see some improvement, but you'll only get amazing results if you sample your very-noisy data at a much higher rate than if you were sampling at a "good enough" rate. The higher your sample rate, the better your results will be. In that way, a Kalman filter is something you want to design around, not a "fix all" for data you already have.

I agree that Kalman filters are not magic and that having a reasonable model is essential for good performance.

Higher sampling rates can help in some cases, especially when tracking fast dynamics or reducing measurement noise through repeated updates. However, the main strength of the Kalman filter is combining a model with noisy measurements, not necessarily relying on high sampling rates.

In practice, Kalman filters can work well even with relatively low-rate measurements, as long as the model captures the system dynamics reasonably well.

I also agree that it's often something you design into the system rather than applying as a post-processing step.

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.

Yeah, I try to err on the side of not using them unless the accuracy obtained through more robust methods is just a no-go, because there are so many ways they can suddenly and irrecoverably fail if some sensor randomly produces something weird that wasn't accounted for. Which happens all the time in practice.

It is always a good idea to include outliers treatment in KF algorithm to filter out weird measurements.

This seems to be an ad for a fairly expensive book on a topic that is described in detail in many (free) resources.

See for example: https://rlabbe.github.io/Kalman-and-Bayesian-Filters-in-Pyth...

Is there something in this particular resource that makes it worth buying?

That's a fair question. My goal with the site was to make as much material available for free as possible, and the core linear Kalman filter content is indeed freely accessible.

The book goes further into topics like tuning, practical design considerations, common pitfalls, and additional examples. But there are definitely many good free resources out there, including the one you linked.

i haven't seen much from other kalman filter resources, but i can say that this book is incredibly detailed and i would highly recommend it

if you dont want to buy the book, most of the linear kalman filter stuff is available for free: https://kalmanfilter.net/kalman-filter-tutorial.html

Huge +1 for Roger Labbe's book/jupyter notebooks. They really helped me grok Kalman filters but also the more general problem and the various approaches that approximate the general problem from different directions.

There are not many good resources on Kalman filters. In fact, I have found a single one that I'd consider good. This is someone who has spent a lot of time to newly understand Kalman filters.