A unified resource-constrained framework for graph SLAM

Graphical methods have proven an extremely useful tool employed by the mobile robotics community to frame estimation problems. Incremental solvers are able to process incoming sensor data and produce maximum a posteriori (MAP) estimates in realtime by exploiting the natural sparsity within the graph for reasonable-sized problems. However, to enable truly longterm operation in prior unknown environments requires algorithms whose computation, memory, and bandwidth (in the case of distributed systems) requirements scale constantly with time and environment size. Some recent approaches have addressed this problem through a two-step process - first the variables selected for removal are marginalized which induces density, and then the result is sparsified to maintain computational efficiency. Previous literature generally addresses only one of these two components. In this work, we attempt to explicitly connect all of the aforementioned resource constraint requirements by considering the node removal and sparsification pipeline in its entirety. We formulate the node selection problem as a minimization problem over the penalty to be paid in the resulting sparsification. As a result, we produce node subset selection strategies that are optimal in terms of minimizing the impact, in terms of Kullback-Liebler divergence (KLD), of approximating the dense distribution by a sparse one. We then show that one instantiation of this problem yields a computationally tractable formulation. Finally, we evaluate the method on standard datasets and show that the KLD is minimized as compared to other commonly-used heuristic node selection techniques.

[1]  John J. Leonard,et al.  An Online Sparsity-Cognizant Loop-Closure Algorithm for Visual Navigation , 2014, Robotics: Science and Systems.

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

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

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

[5]  C. N. Liu,et al.  Approximating discrete probability distributions with dependence trees , 1968, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[6]  Sen Zhang,et al.  Entropy based feature selection scheme for real time simultaneous localization and map building , 2005, 2005 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

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

[8]  John J. Leonard,et al.  Consistent sparsification for graph optimization , 2013, 2013 European Conference on Mobile Robots.

[9]  Ali Shokoufandeh,et al.  Landmark Selection for Vision-Based Navigation , 2006, IEEE Trans. Robotics.

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

[11]  Jonathan P. How,et al.  Two-Stage Focused Inference for Resource-Constrained Collision-Free Navigation , 2015, Robotics: Science and Systems.

[12]  Ryan M. Eustice,et al.  Conservative edge sparsification for graph SLAM node removal , 2014, 2014 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).

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

[14]  Ehud Rivlin,et al.  Landmark Selection for Task-Oriented Navigation , 2007, IEEE Trans. Robotics.

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

[16]  John J. Leonard,et al.  Communication-constrained multi-AUV cooperative SLAM , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).

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

[18]  Frank Dellaert,et al.  iSAM: Incremental Smoothing and Mapping , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.

[19]  Ryan M. Eustice,et al.  Active visual SLAM for robotic area coverage: Theory and experiment , 2015, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[20]  Wolfram Burgard,et al.  Which landmark is useful? Learning selection policies for navigation in unknown environments , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[21]  Christian Schlegel,et al.  Landmark rating and selection according to localization coverage: Addressing the challenge of lifelong operation of SLAM in service robots , 2009, 2009 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[22]  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.

[23]  Hugh F. Durrant-Whyte,et al.  A computationally efficient solution to the simultaneous localisation and map building (SLAM) problem , 2000, Proceedings 2000 ICRA. Millennium Conference. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. Symposia Proceedings (Cat. No.00CH37065).

[24]  Edwin Olson,et al.  Fast iterative alignment of pose graphs with poor initial estimates , 2006, Proceedings 2006 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2006. ICRA 2006..

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

[26]  Simone Frintrop,et al.  Attentional Landmarks and Active Gaze Control for Visual SLAM , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.