Advertisement

Robot Localization without Depth Perception

  • Erik D. Demaine
  • Alejandro López-Ortiz
  • J. Ian Munro
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2368)

Abstract

Consider the problem of placing reflectors in a 2-D environment in such a way that a robot equipped with a basic laser can always determine its current location. The robot is allowed to swivel at its current location, using the laser to detect at what angles some reflectors are visible, but no distance information is obtained. A polygonal map of the environment and reflectors is available to the robot. We show that there is always a placement of reflectors that allows the robot to localize itself from any point in the environment, and that such a reflector placement can be computed in polynomial time on a real RAM. This result improves over previous techniques which have up to a quadratic number of ambiguous points at which the robot cannot determine its location [1, 9]. Further, we show that the problem of optimal reflector placement is equivalent to an art-gallery problem within a constant factor.

Keywords

Projective Geometry Depth Perception Cross Ratio Collinear Point Robot Localization 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    D. Avis and H. Imai. Locating a robot with angle measurements. Journal of Symbolic Computation, 10(3–4):311–326, 1990.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    M. Berger. Geometry, vol. II. Springer-Verlag, 1987.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Betke and L. Gurvits. Mobile robot localization using landmarks. In Proc. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, vol. 2, 135–142, 1994.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    G. Dudek, K. Romanik, and S. Whitesides. Localizing a robot with minimum travel. In Proc. 6th ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, 1995.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    H. Gonzalez-Banos and J. Latombe. A randomized art-gallery algorithm for sensor placement. In Proc. 17th ACM Symposium on Computational Geometry, 2001.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    S. T. L. Heath. The thirteen books of Euclid’s Elements translated from the text of Heiberg with introduction and commentary. Dover Publications, New York, 1956.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    L. S. Shively. Introduction to Modern Geometry. John Wiley & Sons, 1939.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    R. Sim and G. Dudek. Mobile robot localization from learned landmarks. In Proc. IEEE/RSJ Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 1998.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    K. Sugihara. Some location problems for robot navigation using a single camera. Computer Vision, Graphics, and Image Processing, 42(1):112–129, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    O. Veblen and J. W. Young. Projective Geometry, vol. 1. Gin and Company, 1938.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Erik D. Demaine
    • 1
  • Alejandro López-Ortiz
    • 2
  • J. Ian Munro
    • 2
  1. 1.MIT Laboratory for Computer ScienceCambridgeUSA
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada

Personalised recommendations