Distributed Probabilistic Search and Tracking of Agile Mobile Ground Targets Using a Network of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

Chapter

Abstract

As technologies in digital computation, sensing, wireless and wired communications, embedded systems, and micro-electro-mechanical systems continue to advance in the coming years, it is certain that we will see a variety of distributed sensor networks (DSNs) being deployed in an increasing number of systems such as power distribution systems, engineering structures and buildings, smart homes, environmental monitoring systems, biomedical systems, military systems, and others. In addition, unlike the traditional networks of sensors, the mobility afforded by autonomous systems, embedded systems, and humans who carry smart sensing devices will contribute in creating new and exciting future sensor networks. These future networks of sensors that take advantage of man-machine interactions will also introduce new applications yet unknown to us. In this paper, we present the origin and time line of DSN development, analyze the benefits and challenges of DSNs, and present a mobile sensor network in the form of an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) team using distributed mission area probability maps to search and track mobile ground targets. We propose a novel update strategy for the probability map used by UAVs to store probability information of dynamic target locations in the search area. Two update laws are developed to accommodate maps with different scales. Simulation results are used to demonstrate the validity of the proposed probability-map update strategy.

References

  1. 1.
    Dargie W, Poellabauer C (2011) Fundamentals of wireless sensor networks: theory and practice. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Estrin D, Girod L, Pottie G, Srivastava M (2001) Instrumenting the world with wireless sensor networks. In IEEE international conference on acoustics, speech, and signal processing (ICASSP), vol 4, pp 2033–2036Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sohraby K, Minoli D, Znati T (2007) Wireless sensor networks: technology, protocols, and applications. Wiley, HobokenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bryan C, Nishimura C (1995) Monitoring oceanic earthquakes with SOSUS: an example from the caribbean. Oceanography 8(1):4–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nishimura C, Conlon D (1994) IUSS dual use: monitoring whales and earthquakes using SOSUS. Mar Technol Soc J 27(4):13–21Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chong C, Kumar S (2003) Sensor networks: evolution, opportunities, and challenges. Proc IEEE 91(8):1247–1256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rashid R, Julin D, Orr D, Sanzi R, Baron R, Forin A, Golub D, Jones M (1989) Mach: a system software kernel. In: IEEE computer society international conference: intellectual leverage, digest of papers, Feb 1989, pp 176–178Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rashid RF, Robertson GG (1981) Accent: a communication oriented network operating system kernel, vol 15, New York, pp 64–75Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kumar S, Shepherd D (1993) SensIT: sensor information technology for the warfighter. In: Proceedings of 4th international conference on information fusion, pp TuC1-2–TuC1-9Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Warneke B, Last M, Liebowitz B, Pister KSJ (2001) Smart Dust: communicating with a cubic-millimeter computer. Computer 34(1):44–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Asada G, Dong M, Lin TS, Newberg F, Pottie G, Kaiser WJ, Marcy HO (1998) Wireless integrated network sensors: low power systems on a chip. In: Proceedings of the 24th European solid-state circuits conference, Sept 1998, pp 9–16Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Agre JR, Clare LP, Pottie GJ, Romanov NP (1999) Development platform for self-organizing wireless sensor networks. In: Aerosense 1999, Orlando, April 1999Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pottie GJ, Kaiser WJ (2000) Wireless integrated network sensors. Commun ACM 43(5):51–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kahn JM, Katz RH, Pister KSJ (1999) Next century challenges: mobile networking for smart dust. In: International conference on mobile computing and networking, pp 271–278Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kahn JM, Katz RH, Pister KSJ (2000) Emerging challenges: mobile networking for smart dust. J Commun Netw 2(3):188–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
  18. 18.
    http://research.cens.ucla.edu/research/. Accessed on 20-May-2014
  19. 19.
    Corke P, Wark T, Jurdak R, Hu W, Valencia P, Moore D (2010) Environmental wireless sensor networks. Proc IEEE 98(11):1903–1917CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Atia GK, Veeravalli VV, Fuemmeler JA (2011) Sensor scheduling for energy-efficient target tracking in sensor networks. IEEE Trans Signal Process 59(10):4923–4937CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hongju C, Su G, Jiannan H (2012) A distributed cross-layer framework for target tracking in three-dimensional wireless sensor networks. Future wireless networks and information systems, Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, vol 143, Springer, Berlin, pp 653–661Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wong EM, Bourgault F, Furukawa T (2005) Multi-vehicle bayesian search for multiple lost targets. In: IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, Apr 2005, pp 3169–3174Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yick J, Mukherjee B, Ghosal D (2008) Wireless sensor network survey. Comput Netw 52(12):2292–2330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bertuccelli LF, How JP (2005) Robust UAV search for environments with imprecise probability maps. In: 44th IEEE conference on decision and control and 2005 European control conference, Dec 2005, pp 5680–5685Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bertuccelli LF, How JP (2006) Search for dynamic targets with uncertain probability maps. In: American control conference, June 2006Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bourgault F, Furukawa T, Durrant-Whyte HF (2003) Coordinated decentralized search for a lost target in a Bayesian world. In: IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, vol 1, Oct 2003, pp 48–53Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Furukawa T, Bourgault F, Lavis B, Durrant-Whyte HF (2006) Recursive Bayesian search-and-tracking using coordinated UAVs for lost targets. In: IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, May 2006, pp 2521–2526Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bourgault F, Furukawa T, Durrant-Whyte HF (2006) Optimal search for a lost target in a Bayesian world. Field and service robotics, Springer tracts in advanced robotics, vol 24. Springer, Berlin, pp 209–222Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Millet PT, Casbeer DW, Mercker T, Bishop JL (2010) Multi-agent decentralized search of a probability map with communication constraints. In: AIAA guidance, navigation and control conferenceGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mirzaei M, Sharifi F, Gordon BW, Rabbath CA, Zhang YM (2011) Cooperative multi-vehicle search and coverage problem in uncertain environments. In: IEEE conference on decision and control and European control conference, Dec 2011, pp 4140–4145Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Chung TH, Kress M, Royset JO (2009) Probabilistic search optimization and mission assignment for heterogeneous autonomous agents. In: IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, May 2009, pp 939–945Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hu J, Lihua X, Kai-Yew L, Xu J (2013) Multiagent information fusion and cooperative control in target search. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 21(4):1223–1235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    DeLima P, Pack D (2008) Toward developing an optimal cooperative search algorithm for multiple unmanned aerial vehicles. In: International symposium on collaborative technologies and systems, May 2008, pp 506–512Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    DeLima P, Pack D, Jr Sciortino JC (2007) Optimizing a search strategy for multiple mobile agents. In: Society of photo-optical instrumentation engineers (SPIE) conference series, vol 6563Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Beard RW, McLain TW (2012) Small unmanned aircraft: theory and practice. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Maybeck PS (1979) Stochastic models, estimation, and control, Mathematics in Science and Engineering. Academic press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Pukelsheim Friedrich (1994) The three sigma rule. Am Stat 48(2):88–91MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Farmani N, Sun L, Pack D (2014) An optimal sensor management technique for unmanned aerial vehicles tracking multiple mobile ground targets. In: International conference on unmanned aircraft systems, Orlando, May 2014Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Farmani N, Sun L, Pack D (2014) Optimal UAV sensor management and path planning for tracking multiple mobile targets. In: ASME 2014 dynamic system and control conferences, San Antonio, October 2014Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringThe University of Texas at San AntonioSan AntoniaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringThe University of MichiganDearbornUSA

Personalised recommendations