| J.-S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. Proceedings of the 1998 IEEE/RSJ Intl. Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS'98), 1998. |
....tour guide projects, some of the most successful applications of state estimation in autonomous robotics, the robot mainly estimated its own position. Therefore, the performance factors are simply whether or not the robot was lost and the average accuracy over the episodes in which it was not lost [4, 5]. In a nutshell, the cost of game state estimation in a soccer situation could be stated as cost(belief state,situation) w 1 hallucinations w 2 overlooked objects w 3 avg accuracy, where w 1 , w 2 , and w 3 are weights that assess the relative importance of hallucinating and ....
J.-S. Gutmann and D. Fox. An experimental comparison of localization methods continued. In Proc. of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2002.
....tour guide projects, some of the most successful applications of state estimation in autonomous robotics, the robot mainly estimated its own position. Therefore, the performance factors are simply whether or not the robot was lost and the average accuracy over the episodes in which it was not lost [4, 5]. In a nutshell, the cost of game state estimation in a soccer situation could be stated as cost(belief state,situation) w 1 hallucinations w 2 overlooked objects w 3 avg accuracy, where w 1 , w 2 , and w 3 are weights that assess the relative importance of hallucinating and ....
J.-S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In Proc. of the IEEE/RSJ IROS, 1998.
....popularity in computer vision applications. In most variants of the mobile localization problem, particle filters have been consistently found to outperform alternative techniques, including parametric probabilistic techniques such as the Kalman filter and more traditional techniques (see e.g. [18, 51]) MCL has been implemented with as few as 50 samples [26] on robots with extremely limited processing and highly inaccurate actuation, such as the soccerplaying AIBO robotic shown in Figure 2. Recent research has led to a range of adaptations of the basic particle filter. Generating particles ....
J.-S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In IROS-98.
....without the need for extracting landmark features. These methods allow to obtain a robust localization even with quite noisy perceptions. Recently, several techniques for dense sensor matching have been developed, most of which base on probabilistic approaches. Techniques like scan matching [14] uses the Kalman Filter and assumes that both movements and measurements are affected by White Gaussian Noise. These techniques can localize a robot precisely and efciently, but, since they are local methods, they cannot recover from bad matches and or errors in the model. Markov Localization uses ....
Gutmann, J., Burgard, W., Fox, D., Konolige, K.: An experimental comparison of localization methods. In: proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS98). (1998)
No context found.
J.-S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In Proc. of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 1998.
No context found.
J.-S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In Proc. of the IEEE/RSJ InternationalConference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 1998.
No context found.
J.S. Gutmann and D. Fox. An experimental comparison of localization methods continued. In Proc. of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2002.
No context found.
J.S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In Proc. of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 1998.
No context found.
J.-S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In Proc. of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 1998.
No context found.
J.-S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In Proc. of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 1998.
No context found.
Jens-Steffen Gutmann, Wolfram Burgard, Dieter Fox, and Kurt Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In Proc. of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS'98), 1998.
No context found.
J.-S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In Proc. of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 1998.
.... several variants of dynamic Bayes filters in the context of robot localization and people tracking [21, 20, 49, 47, 51, 137] In various experiments we demonstrated the advantages of rich, non parametric representations over more restricted representations such as Gaussians used in Kalman filters [58, 59, 98]. As a consequence of this research, we introduced particle filters [41] as a powerful tool for state estimation in robotics [47, 48, 51] The idea of particle filters is to represent probability densities by sets of samples. This representation allows particle filters to efficiently represent ....
J.S. Gutmann and D. Fox. An experimental comparison of localization methods continued. In Proc. of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2002.
.... several variants of dynamic Bayes filters in the context of robot localization and people tracking [21, 20, 49, 47, 51, 137] In various experiments we demonstrated the advantages of rich, non parametric representations over more restricted representations such as Gaussians used in Kalman filters [58, 59, 98]. As a consequence of this research, we introduced particle filters [41] as a powerful tool for state estimation in robotics [47, 48, 51] The idea of particle filters is to represent probability densities by sets of samples. This representation allows particle filters to efficiently represent ....
J.S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In Proc. of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 1998.
....by the sensors on the robot. The latter initially starts with an empty map in an unknown environment and builds a representation of the environment from the actions carried out by the robot and the measurements of its sensors. For both problems, many solutions have been presented in the past [1, 4, 5, 8, 10, 13, 14]. In general, map building is the harder of the two problems since it requires to not only estimate the position of the robot but also the position of landmarks (walls, corners, etc. in the environment. In many cases special conditions might be needed when building a map such as having the ....
J.-S. Gutmann and D. Fox. An experimental comparison of localization methods continued. In IROS, 2002.
....is employed which is described in the next section. E. Markov Localization as Observation Filter In localization experiments carried out on the mobile robot Rhino [33] it became evident that Markov localization is more robust, while Kalman filtering is more accurate when compared to each other [14]. A combination of both methods is likely to provide a maximum robust and accurate system. For ball localization, this result is utilized by employing a Markov process as an observation filter for the Kalman filter. A grid based approach with a 2 dimensional (x; y) grid is used where each cell z ....
J.S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pages 736 -- 743, Victoria, Canada, October 1998.
....position to be known. The localization matches the original range data with a scan calculated from the map at the same position. As a result we get an estimate for the current position, which we compare with the according aligned scan, that was actually part of the map building process before. In [7] it has been shown that the localization based on laser scans is very accurate precise. Therefore we take it as ground truth. The results are summarized in table II. We have also determined the accuracy by comparing how well the line segments match the scans they have been produced from The ....
J.-S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In Proc. of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 1998.
....mobile robotics is a 2D pose alignment procedure. The problem is as follows: Robot odometry is erroneous. Small error in odometry, caused by effects such as drift and slippage, multiply over time. Such effects are relatively easy to compensate if a model of the environment is readily available [9] . However, in the absence of such a model, the robot faces a chicken andegg problem in that it has to simultaneously estimate both the model and its path. In the robot mapping literature, this problem is known as the simultaneously localization and mapping problem Figure 3: Occupancy grid map ....
J.-S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 1998.
.... The vast majority of existing algorithms address only the position tracking problem (see e.g. the review [4] The nature of small, incremental errors makes algorithms such as Kalman filters [28,37,47,68] applicable, which have been successfully applied in a range of fielded systems (e.g. [27,42,44,63]) Kalman filters estimate posterior distributions of robot poses conditioned on sensor data. Exploiting a range of restrictive assumptions such as Gaussian noise and Gaussian distributed initial uncertainty they represent posteriors by Gaussians. Kalman filters offer an elegant and efficient ....
J.-S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, K. Konolige, An experimental comparison of localization methods, in: Proc. IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS-98), Victoria, BC, 1998.
No context found.
J.-S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. Proceedings of the 1998 IEEE/RSJ Intl. Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS'98), 1998.
No context found.
J. S. Gutmann and D. Fox. An experimental comparison of localization methods continued. In Proc. IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf. on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Lusanne, Switzerland, 2002.
No context found.
J. S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In Proc. IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf. on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Victoria, Canada, 1998.
No context found.
J. Gutmann and D. S. Fox. An experimental comparison of localization methods continued. In Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2002. Available from: http://www.informatik.uni-freiburg.de/~gutmann/.
No context found.
J. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 1998. Available from: http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/ article/gutmann98experimental.html.
No context found.
Jens-Ste#en Gutmann and Dieter Fox. An experimental comparison of localization methods continued. In Proc. of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2002.
No context found.
J. S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In In Proc. of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 1998.
No context found.
J.-S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots & Systems (IROS), pages 736-743, 1998.
No context found.
J.-S. Gutmann and D. Fox. An experimental comparison of localization methods continued. In Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots & Systems (IROS), 2002.
No context found.
J. S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 1998.
No context found.
J.-S. Gutmann and D. Fox. An Experimental Comparison of Localization Methods Continued. In Proc. of the Int. Conf. on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2002.
No context found.
J. Gutmann, W. Burghard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In ##### ############# ############ ########### ###### ### ######, 1998.
No context found.
Gutmann, J.S., Burgard, W., Fox, D., and Konolige, K. 1998. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In the Proceedings of the 1998IEEE/RSJ, International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems,Victoria, B.C., Canada.
No context found.
J.-S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, , and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS'98), Victoria, Canada, October 1998.
No context found.
J.-S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, , and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS'98), Victoria, Canada, October 1998.
No context found.
J.-S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, , and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS'98), Victoria, Canada, October 1998.
No context found.
D. Gutmann, J.-S. Fox. An experimental comparison of localization methods continued. In Proc. of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Lausanne, Switzerland, 2002. EPFL.
No context found.
J.-S. Gutmann and D. Fox. An Experimental Comparison of Localization Methods Continued. In Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2002.
No context found.
J.-S. Gutmann and D. Fox. An experimental comparison of localization methods continued. In Proceedings of International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Lausanne, Switzerland, Sept. 2002.
No context found.
J.-S. Gutmann and D. Fox. An experimental comparison of localization methods continued. In Proc. of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2002.
No context found.
J.-S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In Proc. of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 1998.
No context found.
J.-S. Gutmann and D. Fox. An Experimental Comparison of Localization Methods Continued. In Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), da pubblicare, 2002.
No context found.
J.-S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An Experimental Comparison of Localization Methods. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), October 1998.
No context found.
D. Gutmann, J.-S. Fox. An experimental comparison of localization methods continued. In Proc. of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Lausanne, Switzerland, 2002. EPFL.
No context found.
J-S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An Experimental Comparison of Localization Methods. In proceedings of the International Conference on Intel ligent Robots and Systems, Victoria, Canada, October 1998.
No context found.
J. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige, "An experimental comparison of localization methods," in Proc. of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS'98), 1998.
No context found.
J.-S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In IEEE/RSJ Int. Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 1998.
No context found.
J. Gutmann, W. Burghard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In ##### ############# ############ ########### ###### ### ######, 1998.
No context found.
Jens-Steffen Gutmann and Dieter Fox. An experimental comparison of localization methods continued. In Proc. of the 2002.
No context found.
J.-S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In Proc. of the 1998.
No context found.
J.-S. Gutmann, W. Burgard, D. Fox, and K. Konolige. An experimental comparison of localization methods. In Proc. International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS'98), 1998.
First 50 documents Next 50
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