Advertisement

Autonomous Robots

, Volume 37, Issue 1, pp 27–45 | Cite as

Synthetic data generation for classification via uni-modal cluster interpolation

  • Eric J. CoyleEmail author
  • Rodney G. Roberts
  • Emmanuel G. CollinsJr.
  • Adrian Barbu
Article

Abstract

The observations used to classify data from real systems often vary as a result of changing operating conditions (e.g. velocity, load, temperature, etc.). Hence, to create accurate classification algorithms for these systems, observations from a large number of operating conditions must be used in algorithm training. This can be an arduous, expensive, and even dangerous task. Treating an operating condition as an inherently metric continuous variable (e.g. velocity, load or temperature) and recognizing that observations at a single operating condition can be viewed as a data cluster enables formulation of interpolation techniques. This paper presents a method that uses data clusters at operating conditions where data has been collected to estimate data clusters at other operating conditions, enabling classification. The mathematical tools that are key to the proposed data cluster interpolation method are Catmull–Rom splines, the Schur decomposition, singular value decomposition, and a special matrix interpolation function. The ability of this method to accurately estimate distribution, orientation and location in the feature space is then shown through three benchmark problems involving 2D feature vectors. The proposed method is applied to empirical data involving vibration-based terrain classification for an autonomous robot using a feature vector of dimension 300, to show that these estimated data clusters are more effective for classification purposes than known data clusters that correspond to different operating conditions. Ultimately, it is concluded that although collecting real data is ideal, these estimated data clusters can improve classification accuracy when it is inconvenient or difficult to collect additional data.

Keywords

Interpolation Singular value decomposition Terrain classification Data clusters Pattern classification 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was prepared through collaborative participation in the Robotics Consortium which is sponsored by the U. S. Army Research Laboratory under the Collaborative Technology Alliance Program, Cooperative Agreement DAAD 19-01-2- 0012. The U. S. Government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for Government purposes notwithstanding any copyright notation thereon. Funding for this research also provided by the National Science Foundation, Project EEC-0540865.

References

  1. Bartels, R. H., Beatty, J. C., & Barsky B. A. (1998). Hermite and cubic spline interpolation. In An introduction to splines for use in computer graphics and geometric modeling (pp. 9–17). San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  2. Collins, E. G. Jr., & Coyle, E. J. (2008). Vibration-based terrain classification using surface profile input frequency responses. In Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. Pasadena, California.Google Scholar
  3. Coyle, E. J., Collins, E. G. Jr., & Roberts, R. G. (2011). Speed independent terrain classification using singular value decomposition interpolation. In Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. Shanghai, China. (submitted for publication).Google Scholar
  4. Culver, W. J. (1966). On the existence and uniqueness of the real logarithm of a matrix. Proceedings of American Mathimatical Society, 17, 1146–1151.CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. Davies, P. I., & Higham, N. J. (2003). A Schur–Parlett algorithm for computing matrix functions. SIAM Journal of Matrix Analysis Applications, 25, 464–485.CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. Duda, R. O., Hart, P. E., & Stork, D. G. (2001). Pattern classification (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. DuPont, E. M., Collins, E. G, Jr., Coyle, E. J., & Roberts, R. G. (2008a). Terrain classification using vibration sensors: Theory and methods. In E. V. Gaines & L. W. Peskov (Eds.), New Research on Mobile Robotics. Hauppauge, NY: Nova.Google Scholar
  8. DuPont, E. M., Moore, C. A., Collins, E. G, Jr, & Coyle, E. J. (2008b). Frequency response method for online terrain identification in unmanned ground vehicles. Autonomous Robots, 24(4), 337–347.Google Scholar
  9. DuPont, E. M., Moore, C. A., & Roberts, R. G. (2008c). Terrain classification for mobile robots traveling at various speeds an eigenspace manifold approach. In Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. Pasadena, California.Google Scholar
  10. Feiveson, A. H. (1966). The generation of a random sample-covariance matrix. Technical, Report NASA-TN-D-3207, NASA.Google Scholar
  11. Hildebrand, F. B. (1987). Introduction to numerical analysis (2nd ed.). New York: Dover Publications Inc.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Park, F. C., & Ravani, B. (1997). Smooth invariant interpolation of rotations. ACM Transactions on Graphics, 16(3), 277–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Rasmussen, C. E., & Williams, C. K. I. (2005). Gaussian processes for machine learning (Adaptive computation and machine learning). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  14. Shoemake, K. (1985). Animating rotation with quaternion curves. SIGGRAPH Computer Graphics, 19(3), 245–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ward, C. C., & Iagnemma, K. (2008). Speed-independent vibration-based terrain classification for passenger vehicles. Vehicle System Dynamics, 00, 1–19.Google Scholar
  16. Weiss, C., Fröhlich, H., & Zell, A. (2006). Vibration-based terrain classification using support vector machines. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. Beijing, China.Google Scholar
  17. Yuan, Q., Thangali A., Ablavsky V., & Sclaroff S. (2007). Parameter sensitive detectors. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) pp. 1–6.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eric J. Coyle
    • 1
    Email author
  • Rodney G. Roberts
    • 2
  • Emmanuel G. CollinsJr.
    • 3
  • Adrian Barbu
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringEmbry-Riddle Aeronautical UniversityDaytona BeachUSA
  2. 2.Department of Electrical Engineering, Center for Intelligent Systems, Control, and Robotics (CISCOR)FAMU-FSU College of EngineeringTallahasseeUSA
  3. 3.Department of Mechanical Engineering, Center for Intelligent Systems, Control, and Robotics (CISCOR)FAMU-FSU College of EngineeringTallahasseeUSA
  4. 4.Department of StatisticsFlorida State UniversityTallahasseeUSA

Personalised recommendations