Advertisement

Evolutionary Intelligence

, Volume 6, Issue 3, pp 171–191 | Cite as

A comparative study: the effect of the perturbation vector type in the differential evolution algorithm on the accuracy of robot pose and heading estimation

  • J. MoravecEmail author
  • P. Pošík
Research Paper

Abstract

Evolutionary algorithms (EAs) belong to a group of classic optimizers these days, and can be used in many application areas. Autonomous mobile robotics is not an exception. EAs are utilized profusely for the purposes of localization and map building of unknown environment—SLAM. This paper concentrates on one particular class of EA, the so called differential evolution (DE). It addresses the problem of selecting a suitable set of parameter values for the DE algorithm applied to the task of continuous robot localization in a known environment under the presence of additive noise in sensorial data. The primary goal of this study is to find at least one type of perturbation vector from a set of known perturbation vector types, suitable to navigate a robot using 2D laser scanner (2DLS) sensorial system. The basic navigational algorithm used in this study uses a vector representation for both the data and the environment map, which is used as a reference data source for the navigation. Since the algorithm does not use a probability occupancy grid, the precision of the results is not limited by the grid resolution. The comparative study presented in this paper includes a relatively large amount of experiments in various types of environments. The results of the study suggest that the DE algorithm is a suitable tool for continuous robot localization task in an indoor environment, with or without moving objects, and under the presence of various levels of additive noise in sensorial data. Two perturbation vector types were found as the most suitable for this task on average, namely rand/1/exp and randtobest/1/bin.

Keywords

Differential evolution Robot localization Noisy problems Optimization Navigation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was sponsored by ‘Center Space Software’ company and its mathematical library. NET NMath. Petr Pošík was supported by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport of the Czech Republic with Grant No. MSM6840770012, entitled “Transdisciplinary Research in Biomedical Engineering II”.

References

  1. 1.
    Abbass HA (2002) The self-adaptive pareto differential evolution algorithm. IEEE Congress Evol Comput 1:831–836Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Angeline PJ (1995) Adaptive and self-adaptive evolutionary computations. In: Computational intelligence: a dynamic systems perspective, pp 152–163Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    BarShalom Y, Fortmann TE (1988) Tracking and data association. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Begum M, Mann GKI, Gosine RG (2006) An evolutionary algorithm for simultaneous localization and mapping of mobile robots. In: IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, pp 4066–4071Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Besl PJ, McKay HD (1992) A method for registration of 3-D shapes. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 14(2):239–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Beyer HG (1998) Evolutionary algorithms in noisy environments: theoretical issues and guidelines for practice. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 186(2–4):239–267Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boryczka U, Juszczuk P, Klosowicz L (2009) A comparative study of various strategies in differential evolution. In: Arabas J (ed) International conference on evolutionary computation and global optimizationGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brest J, Greiner S, Boškovič B, Mernik M, Žumer V (2006) Self-adapting control parameters in differential evolution: a comparative study on numerical benchmark problems. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 10(6):646–657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Burgard W, Fox D, Hennig D, Schmidt T (1996) Estimating the absolute position of a mobile robot using position probability grids. In: 13th national conference on artificial intelligence, pp 896–901Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Censi A (2008) An ICP variant using a point-to-line metric. In: IEEE international conference on robotics and automation ICRA, pp 19–25Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cox IJ (1991) Blanche—an experiment in guidance and navigation of an autonomous robot vehicle. IEEE Trans Robot Autom 7(2):193–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Diosi A (2005) Laser range finder and advanced sonar based simultaneous localization and mapping for mobile robots. Dissertation, Monash UniversityGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Diosi A, Kleeman L (2007) Fast laser scan matching using polar coordinates. Int J Robot Res 26(10):1125–1153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Eiben AE, Hinterding R, Michalewicz Z (1999) Parameter control in evolutionary algorithms. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 3(2):124–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fox D, Burgard W, Dellaert F, Thrun S (1999a) Monte Carlo localization: efficient position estimation for mobile robots. In: International Conference on artificial intelligence, pp 343–349Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fox D, Burgard W, Thrun S (1999) Markov localization for mobile robots in dynamic environments. J Artif Intell Res 11:391–427zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gaemperle R, Mueller SD, Koumoutsakos P (2002) A parameter study for differential evolution. Adv Intell Syst, Fuzzy Syst, Evol Comput 1:293–298Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Goldberg DE (1987) Simple genetic algorithms and the minimal deceptive problem. Genetic algorithms and simulated annealing. Pitman, London, pp 74–88Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hampel FR, Ronchetti EM, Rousseeuw PJ, Stahel WA (1986) Robust statistics: the approach based on influence functions. Wiley, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Holland JH (1975) Adaptation in natural and artificial systems. The University of Michigan Press, USAGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Holland JH (1992) Adaptation in natural and artificial systems: an introductory analysis with application to biology, control, and artificial intelligence. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Iacca G, Neri F, Mininno E, Ong YS, Lim MH (2011) Ockham’s Razor in memetic computing: three stage optimal memetic exploration. Inform Sci J 188:17–43MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Islam S, Das S, Ghosh S, Roy S, Suganthan P (2012) An adaptive differential evolution algorithm with novel mutation and crossover strategies for global numerical optimization. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B Cybern 42(2):482–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jin Y, Branke J (2005) Evolutionary optimization in uncertain environments—a survey. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 9(3):303–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kennedy J, Eberhart RC (1995) Particle swarm optimization. IEEE Int Conf Neural Netw 4:1942–1948Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Koza J (1996) Genetic programming: on the programming of the computers by means of natural selection, 5th edn. MIT Press, Cambridge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Koza J (1994) Genetic programming, vol 2. MIT Press, CambridgezbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Krink T, Filipič B, Fogel GB (2004) Noisy optimization problems—a particular challenge for differential evolution? In: Proceedings of 2004 congress on evolutionary computation, pp 332–339Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kwok NM, Liu DK, Dissanayake G (2006) Evolutionary computing based mobile robot localization. Eng Appl Artif Intell 19:857–868CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Latombe JC, Lazanas A (1997) Landmark-based robot navigation. Algoritmica 13(5):472–501MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lazanas A, Latombe JC (1992) Landmark-based robot navigation. Technical Report STANCS-92-1428, Department of Computer Science, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ledraza L, Losada DR, SanSegundo P, Matia F (2008) Building maps of large environments using splines and geometric analysis. In: IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, pp 1600–1605Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Liu J, Lampinen J (2002) Adaptive parameter control of differential evolution. In: 8th International conference on soft computing, pp 19–26Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Liu M., Huang S, Dissanayake G (2009) A new observation model for B-Spline SLAM. In: Australasian conference on robotics and automation (ACRA). Sydney, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lu F, Milios E (1997) Robot pose estimation in unknown environments by matching 2D range scans. J Intell Robot Syst 18(3):249–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mallipeddi R, Mallipeddi S, Suganthan PN (2010) Ensemble strategies with adaptive evolutionary programming. Inform Sci 180(9):1571–1581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Martin F, Munoz LM, Garrido S, Blanco D, Moreno L (2009) L1-norm global localization based on a differential evolution filter. In: IEEE international symposium on intelligent signal processing, pp 229–234Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Metropolis N, Ulam S (1949) The Monte Carlo method. J Am Stat Assoc 44:335–341CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Michalewicz Z, Fogel DB (2000) How to solve it: modern heuristics. Springer, BerlinCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Mininno E, Neri F (2010) A memetic differential evolution approach in noisy optimization. J Memetic Comput 2(2):111–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Mininno E, Neri F, Cupertino F, Naso D (2011) Compact differential evolution. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 15(1):32–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Montes EM, Reyes VJ, Coello CAC (2006) A comparative study of differential evolution variants for global optimization. In: 8th annual conference on genetic and evolutionary computation, pp 485–492Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Montesano L, Minguez J, Montano L (2005) Probabilistic scan matching for motion estimation in unstructured environments. In: IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, pp 3499–3504Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Moravec J (2012) Cascaded evolutionary estimator for robot localization. Int J Appl Evol Comput (IJAEC) 3(3):33–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Moravec HP, Elfes A (1985) High resolution maps from wide angle sonar. IEEE Int Conf Robot Autom, pp 116–121Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Moreno L, Blanco D, Muńoz ML, Garrido S (2011) L1–L2-norm comparison in global localization of mobile robots. Robot Auton Syst 59:597–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Neri F, Iacca G, Mininno E (2011) Disturbed exploitation compact differential evolution for limited memory optimization problems. Inform Sci 181(12):2469–2487CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Neri F, Tirronen V (2010) Recent advances in differential evolution: a survey and experimental analysis. Artif Intell Rev 33(1):61–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Pottmann H, Huang QX, Yang YL, Hu SM (2006) Geometry and convergence analysis of algorithms for registration of 3D shapes. Int J Comput Vis 67(3):277–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Price K, Storn R (1996) Minimizing the real functions of the ICEC’96 contest by differential evolution. In: IEEE international conference on evolutionary computation (ICEC’96), pp 842–844Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Qin AK, Suganthan PN (2005) Self-adaptive differential evolution algorithm for numerical optimization. IEEE Congress Evol Comput 2:1785–1791Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Reynolds CW (1994) Evolution of corridor following behavior in a noisy world. In: 3rd international conference on simulation of adaptive behavior, vol 1, pp 402–2010Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Sasaki Y, Kagami S, Thompson S, Mizoguchi H (2007) Sound localization and separation for mobile robot tele-operation by tri-concentric microphone array. J Robot Mechatron 19(3):281–289Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Segal AV, Haehnel D, Thrun S (2009) Generalized-ICP. Proceedings of Robotics: Science and Systems, Seattle, USAGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Sick AG (2000) PLS proximity laser scanner, installation and operation manual SICK-PLS-100. Sicks AG, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Smit SK, Eiben AE (2009) Comparing parameter tuning methods for evolutionary algorithms. In: IEEE congress on evolutionary computation (CEC 2009), pp 399–406Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Smit SK, Eiben AE (2010) Parameter tuning of evolutionary algorithms: generalist vs. specialist. Appl Evol Comput 6024:542–551Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Smit SK, Eiben AE (2010) Parameter tuning for configuring and analyzing evolutionary algorithms. Swarm Evol Comput 1(1):19–31Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Song Z (2001) 2D laser ray tracing for the simulation of laser perception. Technical Report No. USU-CSOIS-TR-04-11, Center for self-organizing and intelligent systems. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, College of Engineering, Utah State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Storn R (1996) On the usage of differential evolution for function optimization. NAFIPS’96, pp 519–523Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Storn R, Price K (1997) Differential evolution—a simple and efficient heuristic for global optimization over continuous spaces. J Global Optim 11:341–359CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Tao H, Shigeo H (2012) A global localization approach based on line-segment relation matching technique. Robot Auton Systems 60(1):95–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Then TW, Chong EPK (1994) Genetic algorithms in noisy environments. In: IEEE international symposium on intelligent control, pp 225–230Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Vesterstrom J, Thomson R (2004) A comparative study of differential evolution, particle swarm optimization, and evolutionary algorithms on numerical benchmark problems. IEEE Evol Comput 2:1980–1987Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Weber M, Tirronen V, Neri F (2010) Scale factor inheritance mechanism in distributed differential evolution. Soft Comput 14(11):1187–1207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Weiss G, Puttkamer E (1995) A map based on laser-scans without geometric interpretation. Intelligent autonomous systems. IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp 403–407Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Zaharie D (2007) A comparative analysis of crossover variants in differential evolution. In: International multiconference on computer science and information technology, pp 171–181Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Zielinski K, Laur R (2007) Differential evolution with adaptive parameter setting for multi-objective optimization. IEEE Congress Evol Comput 1:3585–3592Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Zhang J, Sanderson AC (2009) JADE: adaptive differential evolution with optional external archive. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 13(5):945–958CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Czech Technical University in PraguePragueCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations