A Kinect-Based Front-End for Graph-SLAM Using Plane Matching in Planar Indoor Environments

  • Zehui Yuan
  • Stefano Rosa
  • Ludovico Russo
  • Basilio Bona
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 302)

Abstract

We present a pose graph optimization approach which enables a mobile robot to create 3D maps of planar indoor environments using a Microsoft Kinect camera. Rather than using point features, the approach relies on the registration of planar surfaces. Plane matching is used to implement a (front-end) for the construction of a pose graph, which is then optimized by a state-of-the-art (back-end). Vertical planes are extracted from acquired point clouds associated to the poses of the robot; then a plane matching algorithm is used to create constraints among successive robot poses. Place revisiting episodes are detected using 3D features in order to provide loop-closing constraints. These constraints provide the input for a pose graph optimization algorithm, which computes an estimate of the robot trajectory. Finally, the 3D map is created by attaching to each pose of the trajectory the corresponding planes. Planar surfaces are more robust and descriptive with respect to point features and provide an accurate estimate of rotations. Moreover, the front-end combines geometric and appearance-based information to filter out outliers and perform robust plane association. Preliminary experimental results in real environments show that the approach is able to create 3D maps which are consistent and close to reality.

Keywords

SLAM RGB-D Plane matching 

References

  1. 1.
    P. Henry et al. “RGB-D mapping: Using depth cameras for dense 3D modeling of indoor environments”. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Experimental Robotics (ISER). 2010.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    M. Magnusson, A. Lilienthal, and T. Duckett. “Scan registration for autonomous mining vehicles using 3D-NDT”. In: Journal of Field Robotics 24.10 (2007), pp. 803–827.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. Nüchter, K. Lingemann, and J. Hertzberg. “6D SLAM-3D mapping outdoor environments”. In: Journal of Field Robotics 24.8–9 (2007), pp. 699–722.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    K. Pathak et al. “Online three-dimensional SLAM by registration of large planar surface segments and closed form pose-graph relaxation”. In: Journal of Field Robotics, Special Issue on 3D Mapping 27.1 (2010), pp. 52–84.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    S. May et al. “Three dimensional mapping with time-of-flight cameras”. In: Journal of Field Robotics 26.11–12 (2009), pp. 934–965.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    S. Thrun, W. Burgard, and D. Fox. “A real-time algorithm for mobile robot mapping with applications to multi-robot and 3D mapping”. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). 2000.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Microsoft. In: http://www.xbox.com/en-US/kinect (2010).
  8. 8.
    J. Borenstein and L. Feng. “Measurement and correction of systematic odometry errors in mobile Robots”. In: IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation 12.5 (1996), pp. 869–880.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    G. Grisetti, C. Stachniss, and W. Burgard. “Non-linear constraint network optimization for efficient map learning”. In: IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems 10.3 (2009), pp. 428–439.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    L. Carlone et al. “A linear approximation for graph-based simultaneous localization and mapping”. In: Proc. of Robotics: Science and Systems. 2011.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    G. Grisetti et al. “A Hierarchical Optimization on Manifolds for Online 2D and 3D Mapping”. In: Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Robotics and Automation. 2010.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    P. J. Besl and N. D. Mckay. “A method for registration of 3-D shapes”. In: IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 14.2 (1992), pp. 239–256.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Y. Furukawa et al. “Reconstructing building interiors from images”. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV). 2009.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    D.G. Lowe. “Distinctive image features from scale-invariant keypoints”. In: International Journal of Computer Vision 60.2 (2004), pp. 91–110.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    H. Bay and A. Ess. “SURF: Speeded up robust features”. In: Computer Vision and Image Understanding (CVIU) 110.3 (2008), pp. 346–359.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    E. Rublee et al. “ORB: an efficient alternative to SIFT or SURF”. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV). 2011.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    M.A. Fischler and R.C. Bolles. “Random sample consensus: a paradigm for model fitting with applications to image analysis and automated cartography”. In: Commun. ACM 24.6 (1981), pp. 381–395.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    B. Steder et al. “Point feature extraction on 3D range scans taking into account object boundaries”. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). 2011.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    R.B. Rusu, N. Blodow, and M. Beetz. “Fast point feature histograms (FPFH) for 3D registration”. In: Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). 2009.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    K. Pathak et al. “Fast 3D mapping by matching planes extracted from range sensor point-clouds”. In: International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). St. Louis, 2009.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    K. Pathak et al. “Fast registration based on noisy planes with unknown correspondences for 3D mapping”. In: IEEE Transactions on Robotics 26.3 (2010), pp. 424–441.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    A. Birk et al. “Surface representations for 3D mapping: a case for a paradigm shift”. In: Künstl Intell 24.3 (2010), pp. 249–254.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    R.B. Rusu et al. “Fast 3D recognition and pose using the viewpoint feature histogram”. In: Proceeding of the International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). 2010.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    A. Harati and R. Siegwart. “Orthogonal 3D-SLAM for indoor environments using right angle corners”. In: Proceedings of the 3rd European Conf. Mobile Robotics (ECMR’07). 2007.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    R. B. Rusu and S. Cousins. “3D is here: Point Cloud Library (PCL)”. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). Shanghai, China, 2011.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    G.Bradski. “The OpenCV Library”. In: Dr.Dobb’s Journal of Software Tools (2000).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    F. Abrate et al. “Three-state Multirobot collaborative localization in symmetrical environments”. In: Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Autonomous Robot Systems and Competitions. 2009.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    N. Suenderhauf and P. Protzel. “Switchable Constraints for Robust Pose Graph SLAM”. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). 2012.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zehui Yuan
    • 1
  • Stefano Rosa
    • 1
  • Ludovico Russo
    • 1
  • Basilio Bona
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Automatica e InformaticaPolitecnico di TorinoTurinItaly

Personalised recommendations