Towards cognitive grasping: modeling of unknown objects and its corresponding grasp types
Original Research Paper
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:
- 165 Downloads
- 1 Citations
Abstract
This paper describes an intuitive approach for a cognitive grasp of a robot. The cognitive grasp means the chain of processes that make a robot to learn and execute a grasping method for unknown objects like a human. In the learning step, a robot looks around a target object to estimate the 3D shape and understands the grasp type for the object through a human demonstration. In the execution step, the robot correlates an unknown object to one of known grasp types by comparing the shape similarity of the target object based on previously learned models. For this cognitive grasp, we mainly deal with two functionalities such as reconstructing an unknown 3D object and classifying the object by grasp types. In the experiment, we evaluate the performance of object classification according to the grasp types for 20 objects via human demonstration.
Keywords
Robotic grasp 3D object modeling Grasp types Object classification Human demonstrationPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Tegin J, Ekvall S, Kragic D, Wikander J, Iliev B (2009) Demonstration-based learning and control for automatic grasping. Intel Serv Robotics 2: 23–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.Mae Y, Takahashi H, Ohara K, Takubo T, Arai T (2011) Component-based robot system design for grasping tasks. Intel Serv Robotics 4: 91–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Perrin DP, Smith CE, Masoud O, Papanikolopoulos N (2000) Unknown object grasping using statistical pressure models. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automationGoogle Scholar
- 4.Morales A, Recatalá G, Sanz PJ, Pobil APD (2001) Heuristic vision-based computation of planar antipodal grasps on unknown objects. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automationGoogle Scholar
- 5.Taylor G, Kleeman L (2002) Grasping unknown objects with a humanoid robot. In: Australasian conference on robotics and automationGoogle Scholar
- 6.Miller AT, Knoop S, Christensen HI, Allen PK (2003) Automatic grasp planning using shape primitives. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automationGoogle Scholar
- 7.Saxena A, Driemeyer J, Ng AY (2008) Robotic grasping of novel objects using vision. Int J Robot Res 27(2): 157–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Yamazaki K, Tomono M, Tsubouchi T, Yuta S (2004) 3-D object modeling by a camera equipped on a mobile robot. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automationGoogle Scholar
- 9.Yamazaki K, Tomono M, Tsubouchi T, Yuta S (2006) A grasp planning for picking up an unknown object for a mobile manipulator. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automationGoogle Scholar
- 10.Yamazaki K, Tomono M, Tsubouchi T (2008) Picking up an unknown object through autonomous modeling and grasp planning by a mobile manipulator. Springer, Berlin, p 42Google Scholar
- 11.Maeda Y, Ishido N, Kikuchi H, Arai T (2002) Teaching of grasp/graspless manipulation for industrial robots by human demonstration. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on intelligent robots and systemsGoogle Scholar
- 12.Ekvall S, Kragic D (2005) Grasp recognition for programming by demonstration. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automationGoogle Scholar
- 13.Ekvall S, Kragic D (2004) Interactive grasp learning based on human demonstration. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automationGoogle Scholar
- 14.Hueser M, Baier T, Zhang J (2006) Learning of demonstrated grasping skills by stereoscopic tracking of human hand configuration. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automationGoogle Scholar
- 15.Choi SI, Park SY, Kim J, Park YW (2008) Multi-view range image registration using CUDA. In: Proceedings of the international technical conference on circuits/systems, computers and communicationsGoogle Scholar
- 16.Lowe DG (2004) Distinctive image features from scale-invariant keypoints. Int J Comput Vis 60(2): 91–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Yilmaz A (2006) Object tracking: a survey. ACM Comput Surv 38(4):article 13Google Scholar
- 18.Criminisi A, Reid I, Zisserman A (1997) A plane measuring device. Image Vis Comput 17(8): 625–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Kolmogorov V, Criminisi A, Blake A, Gross G, Rother C (2005) Bi-layer segmentation of binocular stereo video. In: Proceeding conference on computer vision and pattern recognitionGoogle Scholar
- 20.Han I, Kim H, Kim K, Park JH (2010) Object segmentation and tracking from sequential stereo images for 3D object modeling. In: Proceedings of Korean conference on HCI KoreaGoogle Scholar
- 21.Tangelder JWH, Veltkamp RC (2008) A survey of content based 3D shape retrieval methods. Multimed Tools Appl 39: 441–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Biasotti S, Falcidieno B, Frosini P, Giorgi D, Landi C, Marini S, Patane G, Spagnuolo M (2007) 3D shape description and matching based on properties of real functions. In: EurographicsGoogle Scholar
- 23.Turk M, Pentland A (1991) Face recognition using eigenface. In: Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp 586–591Google Scholar
- 24.Campbell R, Flynn P (1999) Eigenshapes for 3D object recognition in range data. In: Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognitionGoogle Scholar
- 25.Zhao L-W, Luo S-W, Liao L-Z (2004) 3D object recognition and pose estimation using kernel PCA. In: Proceedings of the international conference on machine learning and cyberneticsGoogle Scholar
Copyright information
© Springer-Verlag 2011