ALBATROS: adaptive line-based sampling trajectories for sequential measurements

Measurements in 2D or 3D spaces are ubiquitous among many fields of science and engineering. Often, data samples are gathered via autonomous robots or drones. The path through the measurement space and the location of the samples is traditionally determined upfront using a one-shot design of experiments. However, in certain cases, a sequential approach is preferred. For example, when dealing with a limited sampling budget or when a quick low-resolution overview is desired followed by a steady uniform increase in sampling density, instead of a slow high-resolution one-shot sampling. State-of-the-art sequential design of experiment methods are point-based and are often used to set up experiments both in virtual (simulation) as well as real-world (measurement) environments. In contrast to virtual experimentation, physical measurements require movement of a sensor probe through the measurement space. In these cases, the algorithm not only needs to optimize the sample locations and order but also the path to be traversed by sampling points along measurement lines. In this work, a sequential line-based sampling method is proposed which aims to gradually increase the sampling density across the entire measurement space while minimizing the overall path length. The algorithm is illustrated on a 2D and 3D unit space as well as a complex 3D space and the effectiveness is validated on an engineering measurement use-case. A computer code implementation of the algorithm is provided as an open-source toolbox.

[1]  G. Venter,et al.  An algorithm for fast optimal Latin hypercube design of experiments , 2010 .

[2]  D. W. King,et al.  UAV FAILURE RATE CRITERIA FOR EQUIVALENT LEVEL OF SAFETY , 2005 .

[3]  Dirk Gorissen,et al.  Multiobjective global surrogate modeling, dealing with the 5-percent problem , 2010, Engineering with Computers.

[4]  Rui M. Castro,et al.  Active Learning and Adaptive Sampling for Non-Parametric Inference , 2007 .

[5]  Robert Nowak,et al.  Active Learning and Sampling , 2008 .

[6]  Robert E. Shannon,et al.  Design and analysis of simulation experiments , 1978, WSC '78.

[7]  Manfred Morari,et al.  Multi-Parametric Toolbox 3.0 , 2013, 2013 European Control Conference (ECC).

[8]  William J. Welch,et al.  Computer-aided design of experiments , 1981 .

[9]  D Deschrijver,et al.  Adaptive Sampling Algorithm for Macromodeling of Parameterized $S$ -Parameter Responses , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques.

[10]  Michael Bader,et al.  Space-Filling Curves - An Introduction with Applications in Scientific Computing , 2012, Texts in Computational Science and Engineering.

[11]  Margaret J. Robertson,et al.  Design and Analysis of Experiments , 2006, Handbook of statistics.

[12]  F. Nex,et al.  UAV for 3D mapping applications: a review , 2014 .

[13]  Robin R. Murphy,et al.  How UGVs physically fail in the field , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.

[14]  Marina L. Gavrilova,et al.  Voronoi diagram in optimal path planning , 2007, 4th International Symposium on Voronoi Diagrams in Science and Engineering (ISVD 2007).

[15]  Piet Demeester,et al.  A Surrogate Modeling and Adaptive Sampling Toolbox for Computer Based Design , 2010, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[16]  Jean-Paul Rudant,et al.  Solutions for near real time cartography from a mini-quadrotor UAV , 2009, Remote Sensing.

[17]  Timothy W. McLain,et al.  Spline Based Path Planning for Unmanned Air Vehicles , 2001 .

[18]  D. Hilbert Ueber die stetige Abbildung einer Line auf ein Flächenstück , 1891 .

[19]  Steven Y. Goldsmith,et al.  Exhaustive Geographic Search with Mobile Robots Along Space-Filling Curves , 1998, CRW.

[20]  T. Dhaene,et al.  Automated Near-Field Scanning Algorithm for the EMC Analysis of Electronic Devices , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility.

[21]  Howie Choset,et al.  Coverage of Known Spaces: The Boustrophedon Cellular Decomposition , 2000, Auton. Robots.

[22]  Ella M. Atkins,et al.  Optimal coverage trajectories for a UGV with tradeoffs for energy and time , 2014, Auton. Robots.

[23]  Tom Dhaene,et al.  Efficient space-filling and non-collapsing sequential design strategies for simulation-based modeling , 2011, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[24]  Pablo J. Zarco-Tejada,et al.  Thermal and Narrowband Multispectral Remote Sensing for Vegetation Monitoring From an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[25]  Yangquan Chen,et al.  Low-cost Multi-UAV Technologies for Contour Mapping of Nuclear Radiation Field , 2013, J. Intell. Robotic Syst..

[26]  M. E. Johnson,et al.  Minimax and maximin distance designs , 1990 .

[27]  Edsger W. Dijkstra,et al.  A note on two problems in connexion with graphs , 1959, Numerische Mathematik.

[28]  Wesley H. Huang Optimal line-sweep-based decompositions for coverage algorithms , 2001, Proceedings 2001 ICRA. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Cat. No.01CH37164).

[29]  Antonio Barrientos,et al.  Near-optimal coverage trajectories for image mosaicing using a mini quad-rotor over irregular-shaped fields , 2012, Precision Agriculture.

[30]  Luis Merino,et al.  Experimental results of automatic fire detection and monitoring with UAVs , 2006 .

[31]  Howie Choset,et al.  Coverage for robotics – A survey of recent results , 2001, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[32]  Marc Carreras,et al.  A survey on coverage path planning for robotics , 2013, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[33]  Franz Aurenhammer,et al.  Voronoi diagrams—a survey of a fundamental geometric data structure , 1991, CSUR.