T. Smithers, On quantitative performance measures of robot behaviour, Journal of Robotics and Autonomous Systems (Special Issue: The Biology & Technology of Intelligent Autonomous Agents)15, pp.107-133, 1995.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....quality to the best alternative method, but at a signi cantly reduced computational cost. Related Work So far, relatively few attempts have been made to quantify robot environment interactions or to conduct experimental comparisons of navigating robots. Exceptions include (Sch oner Dose 1992; Smithers 1995), where fundamental sensor motor behaviors were analysed in terms of dynamical systems theory; Lee Reece 1994) where exploration strategies for mapping unfamiliar environments were evaluated; and (Gutmann et al. 1998; Thrun 1998) where various algorithms for self localisation were compared. ....

Smithers, T. 1995. On quantitative performance measures of robot behaviour. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 15(1-2):107-133.

....quality to the best alternative method, but at a significantly reduced computational cost. Related Work So far, relatively few attempts have been made to quantify robot environment interactions or to conduct experimental comparisons of navigating robots. Exceptions include (Schoner Dose 1992; Smithers 1995), where fundamental sensor motor behaviors were analysed in terms of dynamical systems theory; Lee Reece 1994) where exploration strategies for mapping unfamiliar environments were evaluated; and (Gutmann et al. 1998; Thrun 1998) where various algorithms for self localisation were compared. ....

Smithers, T. 1995. On quantitative performance measures of robot behaviour. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 15(1-2):107--133.

....to select appropiate actions. Interacting with partially autonomous agents, which try to fulfil goals with their limited resources and only have restricted environmental perception is notoriously more complicated. Work done in the field of ALife and autonomous reactive agents ( Ste94] Dau97] Smi95] Str97] has shown, that even simple agents exhibit complex behavior, which is very hard to understand and to control. One way to cope with these difficulties is to use natural language in order to interact (specification of task, controlloing ongoing actions, explanation of ongoing action ....

T. Smithers. On quantitative performance measures of robot behaviour. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 15:107--133, 1995.

....The use of meters marks the departure from purely formal models most clearly . Measurement is a process in which two dynamical systems interact. Prem, 1997) Similar examples appealing to dynamics of the system environment relationship as an explanatory tool can be found in Pfeifer (1995) Smithers (1995); Hasslacher Tilden (1996) 2.3 Embodiment in Software In non material domains, this lack of an explicit definition at the heart of embodiment is much more troublesome. If material properties are necessary for embodiment, this presents a serious barrier to the application of the embodiment ....

Smithers Tim (1995). On quantitative performance measures of robot behaviour. In: Rob. & Auton. Sys. 15(1-2): 107-134.

....Firstly, the recorded data were manually divided into laps by finding an obvious landmark (e.g. corner) in the odometer trace. This could easily be done automatically by using an external sensor to detect the completion of another lap by the robot, e.g. using an overhead cross bar sensor as in [9]. For each lap, the accumulated drift error was then removed by correcting each data point by an amount proportional to the distance travelled along the route. Finally, an offset was applied to each of the successive laps to cancel out the remaining translational error between them. T. Duckett, ....

T. Smithers, On quantitative performance measures of robot behaviour, Robotics and Autonomous Systems 15 (1--2) (1995) 107--133.

.... data was divided into laps manually by finding an obvious landmark (e.g. corner) in the odometer trace, although this could easily be done automatically by using an external sensor to detect the completion of another lap by the robot (e.g. using an overhead cross bar sensor as in Smithers [9]) Finally, having obtained a method of tracking the robot s true location, the data was coarse coded into equally sized bins (2m Theta 2m in these experiments) as illustrated in figure 5. The orientation and positioning of the dotted grid shown in figure 5 over the corrected odometer trace was ....

T. Smithers, "On Quantitative Performance Measures of Robot Behaviour", Robotics and Autonomous Systems, Vol. 15, No. 1-2, pp. 107-133, 1995.

.... illustrates the significance of dynamics in generating the phenomena associated with living systems [5] Striking examples of analyses of real world embodiment that appeal to dynamical relationships between systems and the environments in which they are observed can be found in, for example, [6, 7], and particularly in Beer s work [8, 9] Kushmerick [10] illustrates some of the difficulties of adherence to domain specificity in embodiment, which become apparent when trying to apply lessons learnt from the material world to that of the software agent. Without an underlying definition of ....

Smithers, T.: On quantitative performance measures of robot behaviour. Rob. Auton. Sys. 15 (1995) 107-134

.... Christaller, 1998) Large et al. 1997) recurrent neural networks (e.g. Beer, 1995) and stochastic automata (e.g. Baasye et al. 1995) The most common kind of formal analyis concerns the description of attractor structures emerging from learning or evolution (e.g. Robertson et al. 1993)(Smithers, 1995)) In the present article I wish to point out a basic property of dynamical systems based robots, namely, the inherent multifunctionality of input driven dynamical systems. I shall demonstrate the ubiquity of this property, and discuss the di#culties as well as the chances that it might a#ord. ....

Smithers, T. (1995). On quantitative performance measures of robot behavior. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 15(1/2):107--134.

....them. In these experiments, the recorded data was divided into laps manually by finding an obvious landmark (e.g. corner) in the odometer trace, although this could easily be done automatically by using an external sensor to detect the completion of another lap by the robot (as in Smithers [9]) Finally, having obtained a reasonably accurate method of tracking the robot s location, the data was coarse coded into equally sized bins (3m Theta 3m in these experiments) as illustrated in figure 5. The positioning of the dotted grid shown in figure 5 over the corrected odometer trace was ....

T. Smithers, "On Quantitative Performance Measures of Robot Behaviour", Robotics and Autonomous Systems, Vol. 15, No. 1-2, pp. 107-133, 1995.

....large (see section 7 for discussion of this issue) A B Figure 9: Network interference as well as to facilitate comparison between different control systems, different robot platforms, different environments, e.t.c. in other words, they are required tools for the science of robotics (see also [11]) The route learning system was shown to cope with temporary changes to the environment (moving people) however permanent changes (stationary people) could cause failure. As the map developed by the robot can be used for prediction of future perceptions, one way to solve this problem would be ....

T. Smithers. On quantitative performance measures of robot behaviour. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 15(1--2):107--133, 1995.

....is required, and we believe that in the mobile robotics community we are still at an early stage of establishing that language. In particular, few attempts have been made yet to characterise robots, environments or robot environment interaction quantitatively. Exceptions are the work by Smithers ( Smithers 95] Lee and Recce ( Lee Recce 94] and Duckett and Nehmzow ( Duckett Nehmzow 97] In summary, we believe that a science of mobile robotics requires a common language, which in turn requires ffl Quantitative characterisation of mobile robot behaviour, ffl quantitative characterisations of ....

T. Smithers, On quantitative performance measures of robot behaviour, in L. Steels (ed.), The biology and technology of intelligent autonomous agents, Springer Verlag 1995.

....laboratory environments, and few have taken working systems out into larger, unstructured environments to assess their scalability. Furthermore, no generally accepted quantitative measures of performance currently exist in the field for assessing the behaviour of the robot within the laboratory [11], let al..one real world environments. This work therefore represents a case study in attempting to quantify robot performance outside of the laboratory, and shows clearly that small scale and middle scale navigation present different sets of problems for mobile robotics researchers. In previous ....

T. Smithers, "On Quantitative Performance Measures of Robot Behaviour", Robotics and Autonomous Systems, Vol. 15, No. 1-2, pp. 107-133, 1995.

No context found.

T. Smithers, On quantitative performance measures of robot behaviour, Journal of Robotics and Autonomous Systems (Special Issue: The Biology & Technology of Intelligent Autonomous Agents)15, pp.107-133, 1995.

No context found.

T. Smithers, "On quantitative performance measures of robot behaviour", Journal of Robotics and Autonomous Systems (Special Issue: The Biology & Technology of Intelligent Autonomous Agents) 15, pp.107-133, 1995.

No context found.

Smithers, Tim, "On quantitative performance measures of robot behaviour", Journal of Robotics and Autonomous Systems (Special Issue: The Biology & Technology of Intelligent Autonomous Agents), Vol.15, P107-133, 1995

No context found.

Smithers, T.: On quantitative performance measures of robot behaviour. Rob. Auton. Sys. 15 (1995) 107-134

No context found.

T. Smithers. On quantitative performance measures of robot behavior. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 15(1/2):107--134, 1995.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC