Advertisement

Autonomous Robots

, Volume 42, Issue 2, pp 257–272 | Cite as

Environment model adaptation for mobile robot exploration

  • Erik NelsonEmail author
  • Micah Corah
  • Nathan Michael
Article
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Active Perception

Abstract

In this work, we propose a methodology to adapt a mobile robot’s environment model during exploration as a means of decreasing the computational complexity associated with information metric evaluation and consequently increasing the speed at which the system is able to plan actions and travel through an unknown region given finite computational resources. Recent advances in exploration compute control actions by optimizing information-theoretic metrics on the robot’s map. These metrics are generally computationally expensive to evaluate, limiting the speed at which a robot is able to explore. To reduce computational cost, we propose keeping two representations of the environment: one full resolution representation for planning and collision checking, and another with a coarse resolution for rapidly evaluating the informativeness of planned actions. To generate the coarse representation, we employ the Principal of Relevant Information from rate distortion theory to compress a robot’s occupancy grid map. We then propose a method for selecting a coarse representation that sacrifices a minimal amount of information about expected future sensor measurements using the Information Bottleneck Method. We outline an adaptive strategy that changes the robot’s environment representation in response to its surroundings to maximize the computational efficiency of exploration. On computationally constrained systems, this reduction in complexity enables planning over longer predictive horizons, leading to faster navigation. We simulate and experimentally evaluate mutual information based exploration through cluttered indoor environments with exploration rates that adapt based on environment complexity leading to an order-of-magnitude increase in the maximum rate of exploration in contrast to non-adaptive techniques given the same finite computational resources.

Keywords

Active perception Mobile robot exploration Sensor based planning Mapping 

References

  1. Amigoni, F., & Caglioti, V. (2010). An information-based exploration strategy for environment mapping with mobile robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 58(5), 684–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Basilico, N., Amigoni, F. (2008). On evaluating performance of exploration strategies for autonomous mobile robots. In: IEEE/RSJ International conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS), workshop on performance evaluation and benchmarking for intelligent robots and systems, IEEE.Google Scholar
  3. Bourgault, F., Makarenko, A. A., Williams, S. B., Grocholsky, B., Durrant-Whyte, H. F. (2002). Information based adaptive robotic exploration. In Intelligent robots and systems, 2002. IEEE/RSJ international conference on, IEEE (Vol. 1, pp. 540–545).Google Scholar
  4. Burgard, W., Moors, M., Fox, D., Simmons, R., Thrun, S. (2000). Collaborative multi-robot exploration. In IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA) (Vol. 1, pp. 476–481). IEEEGoogle Scholar
  5. Burt, P. J., & Adelson, E. H. (1983). The laplacian pyramid as a compact image code. IEEE Transactions on Communication (TCOM), 31(4), 532–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Charrow, B. (2015). Information-theoretic active perception for multi-robot teams. Ph.D. thesis, University of PennsylvaniaGoogle Scholar
  7. Charrow, B., Kahn, G., Patil, S., Liu, S., Goldberg, K., Abbeel, P., Michael, N., Kumar, V. (2015a). Information-theoretic planning with trajectory optimization for dense 3D mapping. In Robotics: Science and system (RSS).Google Scholar
  8. Charrow, B., Liu, S., Kumar, V., Michael, N. (2015b). Information-theoretic mapping using Cauchy–Schwarz quadratic mutual information. In IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA), IEEE.Google Scholar
  9. Cover, T. M., & Thomas, J. A. (2012). Elements of information theory. Hoboken: Wiley.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Einhorn, E., Schroter, C., Gross, H., (2011). Finding the adequate resolution for grid mapping-cell sizes locally adapting on-the-fly. In: IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA), IEEE, pp. 1843–1848.Google Scholar
  11. Elfes, A. (1989). Occupancy grids: A probabilistic framework for robot perception and navigation. Ph.D. thesis, Carnegie Mellon UniversityGoogle Scholar
  12. Fox, D., Burgard, W., & Thrun, S. (1998). Active markov localization for mobile robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 25(3), 195–207.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Geiger, B. C., Kubin, G. (2013). Signal enhancement as minimization of relevant information loss. In: 9th International ITG conference on systems, communication, and coding (SCC), VDE, pp. 1–6.Google Scholar
  14. Holz, D., Basilico, N., Amigoni, F., Behnke, S. (2011). A comparative evaluation of exploration strategies and heuristics to improve them. In European conference on mobile robots (ECMR), pp. 25–30Google Scholar
  15. Im, J. J., Leonessa, A., Kurdila, A. (2010). A real-time data compression and occupancy grid map generation for ground-based 3D lidar data using wavelets. In ASME dynamic systems and control conference (DSCC).Google Scholar
  16. Julian, B. J. (2013). Mutual information-based gradient-ascent control for distributed robotics. Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  17. Julian, B. J., Karaman, S., Rus, D. (2013). On mutual information-based control of range sensing robots for mapping applications. In IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS), IEEE, pp. 5156–5163.Google Scholar
  18. Kim, S., Kim, J. (2012a). Building large-scale occupancy maps using an infinite mixture of gaussian process experts. In Australasian conference on robotics and automation (ACRA).Google Scholar
  19. Kim, S., Kim, J. (2012b). Building occupancy maps with a mixture of gaussian processes. In IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA), IEEE, pp. 4756–4761.Google Scholar
  20. Kollar, T., & Roy, N. (2008). Efficient optimization of information-theoretic exploration in slam. AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 8, 1369–1375.Google Scholar
  21. Kretzschmar, H., & Stachniss, C. (2012). Information-theoretic compression of pose graphs for laser-based slam. The International Journal of Robotics Research (IJRR), 31(11), 1219–1230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. LaValle, S. M. (1998). Rapidly-exploring random trees a new tool for path planning. Technical report, Compute Science Department, Iowa State University.Google Scholar
  23. Marchant, R., Ramos, F. (2014). Bayesian optimisation for informative continuous path planning. In 2014 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA), IEEE, pp. 6136–6143.Google Scholar
  24. Nelson, E., Michael, N. (2015). Information-theoretic occupancy grid compression for high-speed information-based exploration. In IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS), IEEE.Google Scholar
  25. O’Callaghan, S. T., & Ramos, F. T. (2012). Gaussian process occupancy maps. The International Journal of Robotics Research (IJRR), 31(1), 42–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pivtoraiko, M., Kelly, A. (2005). Generating near minimal spanning control sets for constrained motion planning in discrete state spaces. In IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS), IEEE, pp. 3231–3237.Google Scholar
  27. Pivtoraiko, M., Knepper, R. A., & Kelly, A. (2009). Differentially constrained mobile robot motion planning in state lattices. Journal of Field Robotics (JFR), 26(3), 308–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pivtoraiko, M., Mellinger, D., Kumar, V. (2013). Incremental micro-uav motion replanning for exploring unknown environments. In IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA) Conference on, IEEE, pp. 2452–2458.Google Scholar
  29. Pomerleau, F., Colas, F., Siegwart, R., & Magnenat, S. (2013). Comparing icp variants on real-world data sets. Autonomous Robots (AURO), 34(3), 133–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Principe, J. C. (2010). Information theoretic learning: Rényi’s entropy and kernel perspectives. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. Richter, C., Ware, J., Roy, N. (2014). High-speed autonomous navigation of unknown environments using learned probabilities of collision. In Robotics and automation (ICRA), 2014 IEEE international conference on, IEEE, pp. 6114–6121.Google Scholar
  32. Saarinen, J., Andreasson, H., Stoyanov, T., Ala-Luhtala, J., Lilienthal, A. J. (2013). Normal distributions transform occupancy maps: Application to large-scale online 3D mapping. In IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA), IEEE, pp. 2233–2238.Google Scholar
  33. Shen, S., Michael, N., Kumar, V. (2011). Autonomous multi-floor indoor navigation with a computationally constrained mav. In IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA), IEEE, pp. 20–25.Google Scholar
  34. Shen, S., Michael, N., & Kumar, V. (2012). Stochastic differential equation-based exploration algorithm for autonomous indoor 3D exploration with a micro-aerial vehicle. The International Journal of Robotics Research (IJRR), 31(12), 1431–1444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Stachniss, C., Hahnel, D., Burgard, W. (2004). Exploration with active loop-closing for fastslam. In Intelligent robots and systems, 2004. (IROS 2004). Proceedings. 2004 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on, IEEE, (Vol. 2, pp. 1505–1510).Google Scholar
  36. Strom, D. P., Nenci, F., Stachniss, C. (2015). Predictive exploration considering previously mapped environments. In IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA), IEEE, pp. 2761–2766.Google Scholar
  37. Taylor, C. J., Kriegman, D. (1993). Exploration strategies for mobile robots. In Proceedings of robotics and automation, 1993. 1993 IEEE international conference on, IEEE, pp. 248–253.Google Scholar
  38. Thrun, S., Burgard, W., & Fox, D. (2005). Probabilistic robotics. Boston: MIT press.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. Tishby, N., Pereira, F. C., Bialek, W. (2000). The information bottleneck method. arXiv:physics/0004057.
  40. Vallvé, J., Andrade-Cetto, J. (2014). Dense entropy decrease estimation for mobile robot exploration. In IEEE International conference on robotics and automation (ICRA), IEEE, pp. 6083–6089.Google Scholar
  41. Wurm, K. M., Hornung, A., Bennewitz, M., Stachniss, C., Burgard, W. (2010). Octomap: A probabilistic, flexible, and compact 3d map representation for robotic systems. In Proceedings of the ICRA 2010 workshop on best practice in 3D perception and modeling for mobile manipulation, Vol . 2.Google Scholar
  42. Yamauchi, B. (1997). A frontier-based approach for autonomous exploration. In IEEE international symposium on computational intelligence in robotics and automation (CIRA), IEEE, pp. 146–151.Google Scholar
  43. Yoder, L., Scherer, S. (2015). Autonomous exploration for infrastructure modeling with a micro aerial vehicle. In Field and service robotics (FSR).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer SciencesUniversity of California, BerkeleyBerkeleyUSA
  2. 2.The Robotics InstituteCarnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations