Active planning for underwater inspection and the benefit of adaptivity

International Journal of Robotics Research

Volumn 32, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 3-18

  Hollinger, Geoffrey A ^a   Englot, Brendan ^b   Hover, Franz S ^b   Mitra, Urbashi ^a   Sukhatme, Gaurav S ^a  

^a University of Southern California   (United States)

^b Massachusetts Institute of Technology   (United States)

Author keywords

active perception; adaptivity gaps; motion planning; sensor coverage; underwater robotics

Indexed keywords

3D MESHES; ACTIVE INSPECTIONS; ACTIVE LEARNING; ADAPTIVITY; CONSTANT FACTORS; COST MINIMIZATION; DATA STREAM; INFORMATION GAIN; INSPECTION PLANNING; NON-PARAMETRIC BAYESIAN; PLANNING ALGORITHMS; POINT CLOUD; POTENTIAL BENEFITS; RE-PLANNING; SENSOR COVERAGE; SHIP HULL; SONAR DATA; UNCERTAINTY MODELING; UNDERWATER INSPECTIONS; UNDERWATER ROBOTICS; VARIANCE REDUCTIONS;

ADAPTIVE ALGORITHMS; HULLS (SHIP); INSPECTION; MOTION PLANNING; SONAR; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; UNDERWATER ACOUSTICS;

AUTONOMOUS UNDERWATER VEHICLES;

EID: 84872738346     PISSN: 02783649     EISSN: 17413176     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0278364912467485     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Aloimonos Y, Weiss I, Bandopadhyay A. Active vision. International Journal of Computer Vision. 1988 ; 1 (4). 333-356
2. Am Ende BA. 3D mapping of underwater caves. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications. 2001 ; 21 (2). 14-20
3. Applegate DL, Bixby RE, Chvátal V, et al The Traveling Salesman Problem: A Computational Study. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press ; 2006:
4. Arbel T, Ferrie FP. Entropy-based gaze planning. Image and Vision Computing. 2001 ; 19 (11). 779-786
5. AsadpourANazerzadehHSaberiA (2009) Maximizing stochastic monotone submodular functions. Technical report, 0908.2788v1 [math.OC], arXiv Repository.
6. Bajcsy R. Active perception. Proceedings of the IEEE, Special Issue on Computer Vision. 1988 ; 76 (8). 966-1005
7. Belcher E, Hanot W, Burch J. Dual-frequency identification sonar (DIDSON). Proceedings of the international symposium on underwater technology ; 2002 Tokyo, Japan ; 2002. 187.
8. Buelow H, Birk A. Spectral registration of noisy sonar data for underwater 3D mapping. Autonomous Robots. 2011 ; 30 (3). 307-331
9. Cameron A, Durrant-Whyte H. A Bayesian approach to optimal sensor placement. International Journal of Robotics Research. 1990 ; 9 (5). 70-88
10. Castellani U, Fusiello A, Murino V, et al. A complete system for on-line modelling of acoustic images. Image Communication Journal. 2005 ; 20 (9-10). 832-852
11. Chen SY, Li YF. Vision sensor planning for 3-D model acquisition. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. 2005 ; 35 (5). 894-904
12. Chen S, Li Y, Kwok NM. Active vision in robotic systems: A survey of recent developments. International Journal of Robotics Research. 2011 ; 30 (11). 1343-1377
13. Christofides N Worst-case analysis of a new heuristic for the traveling salesman problem. USA: Computer Science Department, Carnegie Mellon University ; 1976:
14. Cignoni P, Corsini M, Ranzuglia G. Meshlab: An open-source 3D mesh processing system. ERCIM News. 2008 ; 73: 45-46
15. Connolly C. The determination of next best views. Proceedings of the IEEE conference on robotics and automation ; 1985 St Louis, MO, USA ; 1985. 432.
16. Curless B, Levoy M. A volumetric method for building complex models from range images. Proceedings of the conference on computer graphics and interactive techniques ; 1996 New Orleans, LA, USA ; 1996. 303.
17. Das A, Kempe D. Algorithms for subset selection in linear regression. Proceedings of the ACM symposium on the theory of computing ; 2008 Victoria, BC, Canada ; 2008. 45.
18. Dean B, Goemans M, Vondrak J. Approximating the stochastic knapsack: The benefit of adaptivity. Mathematics of Operations Research. 2008 ; 33 (4). 945-964
19. Denzler J, Brown C. Information theoretic sensor data selection for active object recognition and state estimation. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence. 2002 ; 24 (2). 145-157
20. Dragiev S, Toussaint M, Gienger M. Gaussian process implicit surfaces for shape estimation and grasping. IEEE international conference on robotics and automation ; 2011 Shanghai, China ; 2011. 9.
21. Dunn E, Van den Berg J, Frahm J-M. Developing visual sensing strategies through next best view planning. Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems ; 2009 St Louis, MO ; 2009. 4001.
22. Englot B, Hover F. Planning complex inspection tasks using redundant roadmaps. Proceedings of the international symposium on robotics research ; 2011 Flagstaff, AZ, USA ; 2011.
23. Fairfield N, Kantor GA, Wettergreen D. Real-time SLAM with octree evidence grids for exploration in underwater tunnels. Journal of Field Robotics. 2007 ; 24 (1-2). 3-21
24. Fisher ML. The Lagrangian relaxation method for solving integer programming problems. Management Science. 1981 ; 27 (1). 1-18
25. Goemans M, Vondrak J. Stochastic covering and adaptivity. Latin American symposium on theoretical informatics ; 2006 Valdivia, Chile ; 2006. 532.
26. Golovin D, Krause A. Adaptive submodularity: Theory and applications in active learning and stochastic optimization. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research. 2011 ; 42: 427-486
27. Golovin D, Ray D, Krause A. Near-optimal Bayesian active learning with noisy observations. Proceedings of Neural Information Processing Systems ; 2010 Vancouver, BC, Canada ; 2010. 766.
28. Hollinger G, Englot B, Hover F, et al. Uncertainty-driven view planning for underwater inspection. Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation ; 2012 St Paul, MN, USA ; 2012. 4884.
29. Hollinger G, Mitra U, Sukhatme GS. Active classification: Theory and application to underwater inspection. International symposium on robotics research ; 2011 Flagstaff, AZ, USA ; 2011.
30. Hollinger G, Singh S, Djugash J, et al. Efficient multi-robot search for a moving target. International Journal of Robotics Research. 2009 ; 28 (2). 201-219
31. Hoppe H, DeRose T, Duchamp T, et al. Surface reconstruction from unorganized points. Proceedings of the conference on computer graphics and interactive techniques ; 1992 Chicago, IL, USA ; 1992. 71.
32. HoverFSEusticeRMKimA. (2012) Advanced perception, navigation, and planning for autonomous in-water ship hull inspection. International Journal on Robotics Research. Pub ahead of print
33. Hover F, Vaganay J, Elkins M, et al. A vehicle system for autonomous relative survey of in-water ships. Marine Technology Society Journal. 2007 ; 41 (2). 44-55
34. Huang H, Li D, Zhang H, et al. Consolidation of unorganized point clouds for surface reconstruction. ACM Transactions on Graphics. 2009 ; 28 ( 5 ):
35. Johannsson H, Kaess M, Englot B, et al. Imaging sonar-aided navigation for autonomous underwater harbor surveillance. Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems ; 2010 Taipei, Taiwan ; 2010. 4396.
36. Kaess M, Ranganathan A, Dellaert F. iSAM: Incremental smoothing and mapping. IEEE Transactions on Robotics. 2008 ; 24 (6). 1365-1378
37. Kazhdan M, Bolitho M, Hoppe H. Poisson surface reconstruction. Proceedings of the Eurographics symposium on geometry processing ; 2006 Vienna, Austria ; 2006. 61.
38. Kim A, Eustice R. Pose-graph visual SLAM with geometric model selection for autonomous underwater ship hull inspection. Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems ; 2009 St Louis, MO, USA ; 2009. 1559.
39. Krainin M, Curless B, Fox D. Autonomous generation of complete 3D object models using next best view manipulation planning. Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation ; 2011 Shanghai, China ; 2011. 5031.
40. Krause A, Guestrin C. Near-optimal nonmyopic value of information in graphical models. Proceedings of uncertainty in artificial intelligence ; 2005 Edinburgh, Scotland ; 2005. 324.
41. Naghshvar M, Javidi T. Active M-ary sequential hypothesis testing. Proceedings of the IEEE international symposium on information theory ; 2010 Austin, Texas ; 2010. 1623.
42. Pathak K, Birk A, Vaskevicius N. Plane-based registration of sonar data for underwater 3D mapping. International conference on intelligent robots and systems ; 2010 St. Louis, MO, USA ; 2010. 4880.
43. Pfingsten T, Kuss M, Rasmussen CE. Nonstationary Gaussian process regression using a latent extension of the input space. Proceedings of the ISBA world meeting on bayesian statistics ; 2006 Benidorm, Spain ; 2006.
44. Pfingsthorn M, Birk A, Buelow H. Uncertainty estimation for a 6-DoF spectral registration method as basis for sonar-based underwater 3D SLAM. Proceedings of the international conference on robotics and automation ; 2012 St Paul, MN ; 2012. 3049.
45. Rasmussen CE, Williams CKI Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press ; 2006:
46. Roy SD, Chaudhury S, Banarjee S. Active recognition through next view planning: A survey. Journal of Pattern Recognition. 2004 ; 37 (3). 429-446
47. Singh A, Krause A, Guestrin C, et al. Efficient informative sensing using multiple robots. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research. 2009 ; 34: 707-755
48. Sipe MA, Casasent D. Feature space trajectory methods for active computer vision. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Learning. 2002 ; 24 (12). 1634-1643
49. Thompson D, Wettergreen D. Intelligent maps for autonomous kilometer-scale science survey. Proceedings of the international symposium on artificial intelligence, robotics and automation in space ; 2008 Los Angeles, CA ; 2008.
50. Thrun S, Burgard W, Fox D Probabilistic Robotics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press ; 2005:
51. Vasudevan S, Ramos FT, Nettleton EW, et al. Gaussian process modeling of large-scale terrain. Journal of Field Robotics. 2009 ; 26 (10). 812-840
52. Wald A. Sequential tests of statistical hypotheses. Annals of Mathematical Statistics. 1945 ; 16 (2). 117-186
53. Weyrich T, Pauly M, Keiser R, et al. Post-processing of scanned 3D surface data. Proceedings of the IEEE eurographics symposium on point-based graphics ; 2004 Grenoble, France ; 2004. 85.
54. Whaite P, Ferrie FP. Autonomous exploration: Driven by uncertainty. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence. 1997 ; 19: 193-205
55. Williams O, Fitzgibbon A. Gaussian process implicit surfaces. Proceedings of gaussian processes in practice workshop ; 2007 Bletchley, UK ; 2007.
56. Zhou XS, Comaniciu D, Krishnan AK. Conditional feature sensitivity: A unifying view on active recognition and feature selection. Proceedings of the international conference on computer vision ; 2003 Nice, France ; 2003. 1502.