Graph SLAM Sparsification With Populated Topologies Using Factor Descent Optimization

Current solutions to the simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM) problem approach it as the optimization of a graph of geometric constraints. Scalability is achieved by reducing the size of the graph, usually in two phases. First, some selected nodes in the graph are marginalized and then, the dense and nonrelinearizable result is sparsified. The sparsified network has a new set of relinearizable factors and is an approximation to the original dense one. Sparsification is typically approached as a Kullback–Liebler divergence (KLD) minimization between the dense marginalization result and the new set of factors. For a simple topology of the new factors, such as a tree, there is a closed form optimal solution. However, more populated topologies can achieve a much better approximation because more information can be encoded, although in that case iterative optimization is needed to solve the KLD minimization. Iterative optimization methods proposed by the state-of-art sparsification require parameter tuning that strongly affects their convergence. In this letter, we propose factor descent and noncyclic factor descent, two simple algorithms for SLAM sparsification that match the state-of-art methods without any parameters to be tuned. The proposed methods are compared against the state of the art with regard to accuracy and CPU time, in both synthetic and real world datasets.

[1]  Frank Dellaert,et al.  Information-based reduced landmark SLAM , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).

[2]  Wolfram Burgard,et al.  Nonlinear Graph Sparsification for SLAM , 2014, Robotics: Science and Systems.

[3]  Juan Andrade-Cetto,et al.  Information-Based Compact Pose SLAM , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.

[4]  Cyrill Stachniss,et al.  Information-theoretic compression of pose graphs for laser-based SLAM , 2012, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[5]  Hugh F. Durrant-Whyte,et al.  Conservative Sparsification for efficient and consistent approximate estimation , 2011, 2011 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[6]  John J. Leonard,et al.  Temporally scalable visual SLAM using a reduced pose graph , 2013, 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[7]  Mark W. Schmidt,et al.  Optimizing Costly Functions with Simple Constraints: A Limited-Memory Projected Quasi-Newton Algorithm , 2009, AISTATS.

[8]  Kurt Konolige,et al.  g 2 o: A general Framework for (Hyper) Graph Optimization , 2011 .

[9]  Michael Kaess,et al.  Generic Node Removal for Factor-Graph SLAM , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.

[10]  Wolfram Burgard,et al.  Nonlinear factor recovery for long-term SLAM , 2016, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[11]  Frank Dellaert,et al.  Incremental smoothing and mapping , 2008 .

[12]  N. Nathan Self and will , 1997 .

[13]  Juan Andrade-Cetto,et al.  Factor descent optimization for sparsification in graph SLAM , 2017, 2017 European Conference on Mobile Robots (ECMR).

[14]  Randall Smith,et al.  Estimating Uncertain Spatial Relationships in Robotics , 1987, Autonomous Robot Vehicles.

[15]  Frank Dellaert,et al.  Square Root SAM: Simultaneous Localization and Mapping via Square Root Information Smoothing , 2006, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[16]  Gaurav S. Sukhatme,et al.  Designing Sparse Reliable Pose-Graph SLAM: A Graph-Theoretic Approach , 2016, WAFR.

[17]  Liam Paull,et al.  Decoupled, consistent node removal and edge sparsification for graph-based SLAM , 2016, 2016 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS).

[18]  Luca Carlone,et al.  Attention and Anticipation in Fast Visual-Inertial Navigation , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.

[19]  Viorela Ila,et al.  SLAM++ 1 -A highly efficient and temporally scalable incremental SLAM framework , 2017, Int. J. Robotics Res..