Motivation:
Due to constraints on power and cost,
robots operating in unstructured environments such as homes or offices have
limits on onboard computation and limited data on the objects they encounter.
Cloud Robotics proposes a thin-client model where robots are connected to
modern cloud-computing infrastructure for access to distributed computing
resources and datasets, and the ability to share training and labeling data for
robot learning.
Main Points:
l The system has two phases: offline and online.
l Offline phase includes training of the object recognition server, the
creation of object reference data, and the creation and analysis of the
candidate grasp set. For each object, we capture a representative set of
digital images from different viewpoints and use these to train the Google Goggles
object recognition system. We also pre-compute a set of robust grasp
configurations for the PR2 robot and each object using the Columbia University
GraspIt! toolkit. We use sampling of spatial perturbations of each object in
stable resting configurations to estimate robustness of each grasp to spatial
uncertainty.
l Online phase starts when an object is detected by the robot system
which uses an onboard digital camera and 3D scanner to capture a 2D image of
the object and a 3D point cloud and sends the 2D image to servers in the cloud
and retrieves an object identifier, confidence measure, semantic information
about the object including a 3D CAD model and reference point set, or a report
that the object is not recognized.
l If the object is recognized, the robot system locally estimates the
position and orientation (pose) of the object using the 3D CAD model, the
reference 3D point set, and the measured 3D point cloud. The pose is then used
to index the highest probability grasp from the cloud. The robot then transforms
the grasp to the local environment and attempts to execute the grasp. Once the
grasp is executed, the outcome data: the image, object label, detected point
cloud, estimated pose, selected grasp, and success or failure of the grasp is
uploaded to the key-value store server for future reference. Failure can occur
due to false or incorrect identification, or after an unsuccessful grasp.
Trade-offs:
l The paper just said that the outcome data is uploaded for future reference.
It need more details to show how the data improve the grasp selection.
l The weight of an item is an important parameter for grasping the
item. However, for some reasons, the weight of an item can change obviously
even the appearance remains the same. For example, a full bottle of water
compares to the bottle without water. Therefore, we cannot hardcode the weight
of an item and need some methods to deal with this problem.
l Different size of a kind of item may have the similar image. So, we
need a method to determine the size of an item. For example, we can use the
robot’s hand as a reference to obtain the size of an item.
Do you have any thoughts about the suitability of the cloud to support this application area? Any points that the paper glossed over?
ReplyDelete