Comparing Robot Controllers Through System Identification

  • Ulrich Nehmzow
  • Otar Akanyeti
  • Roberto Iglesias
  • Theocharis Kyriacou
  • S. A. Billings
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4095)


In mobile robotics, it is common to find different control programs designed to achieve a particular robot task. It is often necessary to compare the performance of such controllers. So far this is usually done qualitatively, because of a lack of quantitative behaviour analysis methods.

In this paper we present a novel approach to compare robot control codes quantitatively, based on system identification. Using the NARMAX system identification process, we “translate” the original behaviour into a transparent, analysable mathematical model of the original behaviour. We then use statistical methods and sensitivity analysis to compare models quantitatively.

We demonstrate our approach by comparing two different robot control programs, which were designed to drive a Magellan Pro robot through door-like openings.


Mobile Robot Open Loop Controller Training Environment Robot Controller Mobile Robotic 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Korenberg, M., Billings, S.A., Liu, Y.P., Mcllroy, P.J.: Orthogonal Parameter Estimation Algorithm for Non-Linear Stochastic Systems. Int. J. Control 48(1), 193–210 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Iglesias, R., Kyriacou, T., Nehmzow, U., Billings, S.A.: Task Identification and Characterisation in Mobile Robotics. In: Proc. Towards Autonomous Robotic Systems, TAROS, Essex (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Iglesias, R., Kyriacou, T., Nehmzow, U., Billings, S.A.: Modelling and characterisation of a mobile robot’s operation. In: Proc. CAEPIA 2005, 11th Conference of the Spanish association for Artificial Intelligence, Santiago De Compostela (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Iglesias, R., Nehmzow, U., Kyriacou, T., Billings, S.A.: Programming Through System Identification and Training. In: Proc. European Conference on Mobile Robotics, Ancona (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kyriacou, T., Nehmzow, U., Iglesias, R., Billings, S.A.: Cross-Platform Programming Through System Identification. In: Proc. Towards Autonomous Robotic Systems, TAROS, London (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barnard, C., Gilbert, F., McGregor, P.: Asking questions in Biology, key Skills for Practical Assessments and Project Work. Pearson Education Limited, London (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dorf, P.C., Bishop, R.H.: Modern Control Systems. Addison Wesley, Reading (1995)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Morris, M.D.: Factorial sampling plans for preliminary computational experiments. Technometrics 33(2), 161–174 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Saltelli, A., Chan, K., Scott, E.M.: Sensitivity Analysis. John Wiley, Chichester (2000)MATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sobol, I.M.: Sensitivity Estimates for Nonlinear Mathematical Models. J. Mathematical Modelling and Computational Experiment 1, 407–414 (1993)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ulrich Nehmzow
    • 1
  • Otar Akanyeti
    • 1
  • Roberto Iglesias
    • 2
  • Theocharis Kyriacou
    • 1
  • S. A. Billings
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of EssexUK
  2. 2.Electronics and Computer ScienceUniversity of Santiago de CompostelaSpain
  3. 3.Dept. of Automatic Control and Systems EngineeringUniversity of SheffieldUK

Personalised recommendations