Page 356 - Autonomous Mobile Robots
P. 356

346                                    Autonomous Mobile Robots




                                                                      . . .
                                                E 1
                                                                    F 2      ∗
                                                               F 1        F n
                                                               . . .
                                                E 2
                                                                      ∗
                                                       F 1  F 2    F n
                                                                     . . .




                                                                    . . .
                                                E m                     F n ∗
                                                            F 1  F 2
                                FIGURE 9.2 Interpretation tree of measurements E 1 , ... , E m in terms of map features
                                F 1 , ... , F n .

                                9.3 DATA ASSOCIATION IN SLAM
                                Assume that a new set of m measurements z ={z 1 , ... , z m } of the environ-
                                ment features {E 1 , ... , E m } have been obtained by a sensor mounted on the
                                vehicle. As mentioned in Section 9.2, the goal of data association is to generate
                                a hypothesis H =[j 1 j 2 ··· j m ] associating each measurement E i with its
                                                         (j i = 0 indicating that z i does not correspond
                                corresponding map feature F j i
                                to any map feature). The space of measurement-feature correspondences can
                                be represented as an interpretation tree of m levels [30] (see Figure 9.2); each
                                node at level i, called an i-interpretation, provides an interpretation for the first
                                i measurements. Each node has n + 1 branches, corresponding to each of the
                                alternative interpretations for measurement E i , including the possibility that
                                the measurement be spurious and allowing map feature repetitions in the same
                                hypothesis. Data association algorithms must select in some way one of the
                                      m
                                (n+1) m-interpretations as the correct hypothesis, carrying out validations to
                                determine the compatibility between sensor measurements and map features.


                                9.3.1 Individual Compatibility Nearest Neighbor
                                The simplest criterion to decide a pairing for a given measurement is the nearest
                                neighbor (NN), which consists in choosing among the features that satisfy IC of
                                Equation (9.9), the one with the smallest Mahalanobis distance. A popular data
                                association algorithm, the Individual Compatibility Nearest Neighbor (ICNN,
                                Algorithm 9.2), is based on this idea. It is frequently used given its conceptual
                                simplicity and computational efficiency: it performs m · n compatibility tests,
                                making it linear with the size of the map.




                                 © 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC



                                FRANKL: “dk6033_c009” — 2006/3/31 — 16:43 — page 346 — #16
   351   352   353   354   355   356   357   358   359   360   361