1 CMPUT 412 Autonomous Map Building Csaba Szepesvári University of Alberta TexPoint fonts used in EMF. Read the TexPoint manual before you delete this.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Mapping with Known Poses
Advertisements

Probabilistic Robotics
Advanced Mobile Robotics
(Includes references to Brian Clipp
Monte Carlo Localization for Mobile Robots Karan M. Gupta 03/10/2004
IR Lab, 16th Oct 2007 Zeyn Saigol
Probabilistic Robotics
Markov Localization & Bayes Filtering 1 with Kalman Filters Discrete Filters Particle Filters Slides adapted from Thrun et al., Probabilistic Robotics.
Bayes Filters Pieter Abbeel UC Berkeley EECS Many slides adapted from Thrun, Burgard and Fox, Probabilistic Robotics TexPoint fonts used in EMF. Read the.
Probabilistic Robotics Bayes Filter Implementations Particle filters.
Localization David Johnson cs6370. Basic Problem Go from thisto this.
Probabilistic Robotics: Kalman Filters
CS 188: Artificial Intelligence Fall 2009 Lecture 20: Particle Filtering 11/5/2009 Dan Klein – UC Berkeley TexPoint fonts used in EMF. Read the TexPoint.
Autonomous Robot Navigation Panos Trahanias ΗΥ475 Fall 2007.
Particle Filters Pieter Abbeel UC Berkeley EECS Many slides adapted from Thrun, Burgard and Fox, Probabilistic Robotics TexPoint fonts used in EMF. Read.
Graphical Models for Mobile Robot Localization Shuang Wu.
gMapping TexPoint fonts used in EMF.
Introduction to Kalman Filter and SLAM Ting-Wei Hsu 08/10/30.
Probabilistic Robotics
SLAM: Simultaneous Localization and Mapping: Part I Chang Young Kim These slides are based on: Probabilistic Robotics, S. Thrun, W. Burgard, D. Fox, MIT.
Probabilistic Robotics
Monte Carlo Localization
SA-1 Probabilistic Robotics Mapping with Known Poses.
Probabilistic Robotics
Probabilistic Robotics Bayes Filter Implementations Particle filters.
City College of New York 1 Dr. John (Jizhong) Xiao Department of Electrical Engineering City College of New York A Taste of Localization.
Probabilistic Robotics Bayes Filter Implementations Gaussian filters.
Bayesian Filtering for Location Estimation D. Fox, J. Hightower, L. Liao, D. Schulz, and G. Borriello Presented by: Honggang Zhang.
Particle Filtering. Sensors and Uncertainty Real world sensors are noisy and suffer from missing data (e.g., occlusions, GPS blackouts) Use sensor models.
Particle Filters++ TexPoint fonts used in EMF.
Bayesian Filtering Dieter Fox Probabilistic Robotics Key idea: Explicit representation of uncertainty (using the calculus of probability theory) Perception.
HCI / CprE / ComS 575: Computational Perception
Bayesian Filtering for Robot Localization
Markov Localization & Bayes Filtering
Localization and Mapping (3)
Efficient Approaches to Mapping with Rao- Blackwellized Particle Filters Department of Computer Science University of Freiburg, Germany Wolfram Burgard.
SA-1 Mapping with Known Poses Ch 4.2 and Ch 9. 2 Why Mapping? Learning maps is one of the fundamental problems in mobile robotics Maps allow robots to.
Simultaneous Localization and Mapping Presented by Lihan He Apr. 21, 2006.
Probabilistic Robotics: Monte Carlo Localization
Probabilistic Robotics Bayes Filter Implementations Gaussian filters.
1 Robot Environment Interaction Environment perception provides information about the environment’s state, and it tends to increase the robot’s knowledge.
Probabilistic Robotics Bayes Filter Implementations.
Young Ki Baik, Computer Vision Lab.
Simultaneous Localization and Mapping
Visual SLAM Visual SLAM SPL Seminar (Fri) Young Ki Baik Computer Vision Lab.
Mobile Robot Localization (ch. 7)
1 CMPUT 412 Localization Csaba Szepesvári University of Alberta TexPoint fonts used in EMF. Read the TexPoint manual before you delete this box.: AA A.
Robot Mapping Short Introduction to Particle Filters and Monte Carlo Localization.
City College of New York 1 Dr. Jizhong Xiao Department of Electrical Engineering City College of New York Advanced Mobile Robotics.
CSE-473 Mobile Robot Mapping. Mapping with Raw Odometry.
Particle Filtering. Sensors and Uncertainty Real world sensors are noisy and suffer from missing data (e.g., occlusions, GPS blackouts) Use dynamics models.
Probabilistic Robotics
Tracking with dynamics
Particle Filtering. Sensors and Uncertainty Real world sensors are noisy and suffer from missing data (e.g., occlusions, GPS blackouts) Use sensor models.
Fast SLAM Simultaneous Localization And Mapping using Particle Filter A geometric approach (as opposed to discretization approach)‏ Subhrajit Bhattacharya.
10-1 Probabilistic Robotics: FastSLAM Slide credits: Wolfram Burgard, Dieter Fox, Cyrill Stachniss, Giorgio Grisetti, Maren Bennewitz, Christian Plagemann,
Particle filters for Robot Localization An implementation of Bayes Filtering Markov Localization.
Autonomous Mobile Robots Autonomous Systems Lab Zürich Probabilistic Map Based Localization "Position" Global Map PerceptionMotion Control Cognition Real.
CSE-473 Mobile Robot Mapping.
Probabilistic Robotics
Introduction to particle filter
Particle Filter/Monte Carlo Localization
Particle filters for Robot Localization
Introduction to particle filter
A Short Introduction to the Bayes Filter and Related Models
Particle Filtering.
Probabilistic Map Based Localization
Non-parametric Filters: Particle Filters
Non-parametric Filters: Particle Filters
Probabilistic Robotics Bayes Filter Implementations FastSLAM
Presentation transcript:

1 CMPUT 412 Autonomous Map Building Csaba Szepesvári University of Alberta TexPoint fonts used in EMF. Read the TexPoint manual before you delete this box.: AA A A A A AA

2 Autonomous Map Building Starting from an arbitrary initial point, a mobile robot should be able to autonomously explore the environment with its on board sensors, gain knowledge about it, interpret the scene, build an appropriate map and localize itself relative to this map. SLAM The Simultaneous Localization and Mapping Problem

3 How to Establish a Map?  Methods By hand Learning  Why learn? Spare cost Keep map up-to-date Specialize to robot’s perceptual caps  What map to learn? Uses of a map? Localization Navigation/planning Updateable  What is a good map? Metric correctness Topological correctness Perceptual correctness  Map alone is not enough!

4 The Challenges 1. Changes in the environment e.g. disappearing cupboard  Represent posterior over presence of objects in the map! 2. Chicken-egg-problem position of robot  position of wall position of wall  position of robot  Posterior over maps!

5 Map Building – Main Idea  Localization: P( X t =x | Y 1,A 1, …, A t-1,Y t ) = ? x: Possible position X t : Robot’s position at time t A t : Action at time t Y t : percept at time t “posterior over states”  Position from observations  pdfs over positions!  Inferring a map from observations?  pdfs over maps!  M 0 : Map randomly drawn at step 0!  P( M 0 = m | Y 1,A 1, …, A t-1,Y t ) = ?  Dynamic maps: M t+1 ~ p(.|M t ) P( M t = m | Y 1,A 1, …, A t-1,Y t ) = ?

6 How to Build Maps?  M 0 : Map randomly drawn at step 0!  P( M 0 = m | Y 1,A 1, …, A t-1,Y t ) = ?  Dynamic maps: M t+1 ~ p(.|M t ) P( M t = m | Y 1,A 1, …, A t-1,Y t ) = ?  How to get the posterior?  BAYES RULE; H_t = Y 1,A 1, …, A t-1,Y t P( M t =m|H t ) ~ P(A t-1,Y t |M t =m,H t-1 ) P(M t =m|H t-1 ) ¼ P(Y t |M t =m,X t-1 ) x  m’ P(M t =m|M t-1 =m’)P(M t-1 =m’|H t-1 )  Too many maps! HEURISTICS:  store likely maps only  [and/or] compression

7 Map Building Localization:  Action update: b t ’ = Act(b t-1 )  Perception update: b t = See(b t ’,Y t,M) 1.Map and action update: 1.m t ’ =Evol(m t-1 ) 2.b t ’ = Act(b t-1 ) 2.Perception update: 1.(b t,,m t ) = Consensus(b t ’,Y t,m t ’)

8 A Semi-Parametric Representation.. x i – location of feature z i – mean observation § i – covariance c i – confidence

9 Particle Filtering – Localization  Belief representation ¼ “particle cloud”  Particle  position hypothesis  Survival of the fittest  Particle deprivation (histories are not well represented) ParticleFilter(X t-1 (1),..,X t-1 (N)) 1.For i=1 to N do 1.Action update: // “proposing” X t ’(i) ~ Act(.|X t-1 (i)) 2.Perc. Update: // “filtering” w t (i) = p( Y t | X t ’(i)) 2.For i=1 to N do // “resampling” 1.Draw I t ~ w t (.) 2.Put X t ’ in Cloud 3.Return (Cloud)

10 Example – Laser Scanning

11 FastSLAM – PF for SLAM ParticleFilter((M t-1 (i),X t-1 (i)); i=1.., N) 1.For i=1 to N do 1.X t ’(i) = Act(.|X t-1 (i)) 2.w t (i) = P(Y t |X t ’(i),M t-1 (i)) 3.M t ’(i) = Learn(Y t,X t ’(i),M t-1 (i)) 2.For i=1 to N do 1.Draw J with probability / w t (.) 2.Add (M t ’(J),X t (J)) to Cloud 3.Return (Cloud)

12 Example map of particle 1 map of particle 3 map of particle 2 3 particles

13 Problem  Each map is quite big in case of grid maps  Since each particle maintains its own map  Therefore, one needs to keep the number of particles small  Solution: Compute better proposal distributions!  Idea: Improve the pose estimate before applying the particle filter

14 Motion Model for Scan Matching Raw Odometry Scan Matching

15 When to Resample?  Resampling is dangerous  “Effective number of samples”:  How much variation in weights..  Only re-sample when n eff drops below a given threshold (n/2)

16 Typical Evolution of n eff visiting new areas closing the first loop second loop closure visiting known areas

17 Intel Lab  15 particles  four times faster than real-time P4, 2.8GHz  5cm resolution during scan matching  1cm resolution in final map

18 Intel Lab  15 particles  Compared to FastSLAM with Scan-Matching, the particles are propagated closer to the true distribution

19 Intel Lab

20 Outdoor Campus Map  30 particles  250x250m 2  1.75 km (odometry)  20cm resolution during scan matching  30cm resolution in final map  30 particles  250x250m 2  miles (odometry)  20cm resolution during scan matching  30cm resolution in final map

21 Dynamic Environments  Changes require continuous mapping  Need for better perception!

22 Summary  SLAM  Probabilistic Approach  Particle Filters  FastSLAM  Still many open problems! Dynamic Environments Exploration?