87,016 research outputs found
Kinematics and Robot Design II (KaRD2019) and III (KaRD2020)
This volume collects papers published in two Special Issues âKinematics and Robot Design II, KaRD2019â (https://www.mdpi.com/journal/robotics/special_issues/KRD2019) and âKinematics and Robot Design III, KaRD2020â (https://www.mdpi.com/journal/robotics/special_issues/KaRD2020), which are the second and third issues of the KaRD Special Issue series hosted by the open access journal robotics.The KaRD series is an open environment where researchers present their works and discuss all topics focused on the many aspects that involve kinematics in the design of robotic/automatic systems. It aims at being an established reference for researchers in the field as other serial international conferences/publications are. Even though the KaRD series publishes one Special Issue per year, all the received papers are peer-reviewed as soon as they are submitted and, if accepted, they are immediately published in MDPI Robotics. Kinematics is so intimately related to the design of robotic/automatic systems that the admitted topics of the KaRD series practically cover all the subjects normally present in well-established international conferences on âmechanisms and roboticsâ.KaRD2019 together with KaRD2020 received 22 papers and, after the peer-review process, accepted only 17 papers. The accepted papers cover problems related to theoretical/computational kinematics, to biomedical engineering and to other design/applicative aspects
A review of mobile robots: Concepts, methods, theoretical framework, and applications
[EN] Humanoid robots, unmanned rovers, entertainment pets, drones, and so on are great examples of mobile robots. They can be distinguished from other robots by their ability to move autonomously, with enough intelligence to react and make decisions based on the perception they receive from the environment. Mobile robots must have some source of input data, some way of decoding that input, and a way of taking actions (including its own motion) to respond to a changing world. The need to sense and adapt to an unknown environment requires a powerful cognition system. Nowadays, there are mobile robots that can walk, run, jump, and so on like their biological counterparts. Several fields of robotics have arisen, such as wheeled mobile robots, legged robots, flying robots, robot vision, artificial intelligence, and so on, which involve different technological areas such as mechanics, electronics, and computer science. In this article, the world of mobile robots is explored including the new trends. These new trends are led by artificial intelligence, autonomous driving, network communication, cooperative work, nanorobotics, friendly human-robot interfaces, safe human-robot interaction, and emotion expression and perception. Furthermore, these news trends are applied to different fields such as medicine, health care, sports, ergonomics, industry, distribution of goods, and service robotics. These tendencies will keep going their evolution in the coming years.The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, which has funded the DPI2013-44227-R project.Rubio Montoya, FJ.; Valero ChuliĂĄ, FJ.; Llopis Albert, C. (2019). A review of mobile robots: Concepts, methods, theoretical framework, and applications. International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems. 16(2):1-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1729881419839596S122162Brunete, A., Ranganath, A., Segovia, S., de Frutos, J. P., Hernando, M., & Gambao, E. (2017). Current trends in reconfigurable modular robots design. International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems, 14(3), 172988141771045. doi:10.1177/1729881417710457Bajracharya, M., Maimone, M. W., & Helmick, D. (2008). Autonomy for Mars Rovers: Past, Present, and Future. Computer, 41(12), 44-50. doi:10.1109/mc.2008.479Carsten, J., Rankin, A., Ferguson, D., & Stentz, A. (2007). Global Path Planning on Board the Mars Exploration Rovers. 2007 IEEE Aerospace Conference. doi:10.1109/aero.2007.352683Grotzinger, J. P., Crisp, J., Vasavada, A. R., Anderson, R. C., Baker, C. J., Barry, R., ⊠Wiens, R. C. (2012). Mars Science Laboratory Mission and Science Investigation. Space Science Reviews, 170(1-4), 5-56. doi:10.1007/s11214-012-9892-2Khatib, O., Yeh, X., Brantner, G., Soe, B., Kim, B., Ganguly, S., ⊠Creuze, V. (2016). Ocean One: A Robotic Avatar for Oceanic Discovery. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, 23(4), 20-29. doi:10.1109/mra.2016.2613281Ceccarelli, M. (2012). Notes for a History of Grasping Devices. Mechanisms and Machine Science, 3-16. doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-4664-3_1Campion, G., & Chung, W. (2008). Wheeled Robots. Springer Handbook of Robotics, 391-410. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-30301-5_18Ferriere, L., Raucent, B., & Campion, G. (s. f.). Design of omnimobile robot wheels. Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. doi:10.1109/robot.1996.509271Campion, G., Bastin, G., & Dandrea-Novel, B. (1996). Structural properties and classification of kinematic and dynamic models of wheeled mobile robots. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 12(1), 47-62. doi:10.1109/70.481750BaĆchanowski, J. (2012). Mobile Wheel-Legged Robot: Researching of Suspension Leveling System. Mechanisms and Machine Science, 3-12. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-5125-5_1Williams, R. L., Carter, B. E., Gallina, P., & Rosati, G. (2002). Dynamic model with slip for wheeled omnidirectional robots. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 18(3), 285-293. doi:10.1109/tra.2002.1019459Chan, R. P. M., Stol, K. A., & Halkyard, C. R. (2013). Review of modelling and control of two-wheeled robots. Annual Reviews in Control, 37(1), 89-103. doi:10.1016/j.arcontrol.2013.03.004Kim, H., & Kim, B. K. (2014). Online Minimum-Energy Trajectory Planning and Control on a Straight-Line Path for Three-Wheeled Omnidirectional Mobile Robots. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 61(9), 4771-4779. doi:10.1109/tie.2013.2293706Carbone, G., & Ceccarelli, M. (2005). Legged Robotic Systems. Cutting Edge Robotics. doi:10.5772/4669Chestnutt, J., Lau, M., Cheung, G., Kuffner, J., Hodgins, J., & Kanade, T. (s. f.). Footstep Planning for the Honda ASIMO Humanoid. Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. doi:10.1109/robot.2005.1570188Arikawa, K., & Hirose, S. (s. f.). Development of quadruped walking robot TITAN-VIII. Proceedings of IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. IROS â96. doi:10.1109/iros.1996.570670Kurazume, R., Byong-won, A., Ohta, K., & Hasegawa, T. (s. f.). Experimental study on energy efficiency for quadruped walking vehicles. Proceedings 2003 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2003) (Cat. No.03CH37453). doi:10.1109/iros.2003.1250697Hirose, S., Fukuda, Y., Yoneda, K., Nagakubo, A., Tsukagoshi, H., Arikawa, K., ⊠Hodoshima, R. (2009). Quadruped walking robots at Tokyo Institute of Technology. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, 16(2), 104-114. doi:10.1109/mra.2009.932524Stoica, A., Carbone, G., Ceccarelli, M., & Pisla, D. (2010). Cassino HexapodâŻ: Experiences and new leg design. 2010 IEEE International Conference on Automation, Quality and Testing, Robotics (AQTR). doi:10.1109/aqtr.2010.5520756Bares, J. E., & Wettergreen, D. S. (1999). Dante II: Technical Description, Results, and Lessons Learned. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 18(7), 621-649. doi:10.1177/02783649922066475Schiele, A., Romstedt, J., Lee, C., Henkel, H., Klinkner, S., Bertrand, R., ⊠Michaelis, H. (2008). NanoKhod Exploration Rover - A Rugged Rover Suited for Small, Low-Cost, Planetary Lander Mission. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, 15(2), 96-107. doi:10.1109/mra.2008.917888Takayama, T., & Hirose, S. (2003). Development of Souryu I & II -Connected Crawler Vehicle for Inspection of Narrow and Winding Space. Journal of Robotics and Mechatronics, 15(1), 61-69. doi:10.20965/jrm.2003.p0061Cuesta, F., & Ollero, A. (2005). Intelligent Mobile Robot Navigation. Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics. doi:10.1007/b14079Ohya, I., Kosaka, A., & Kak, A. (1998). Vision-based navigation by a mobile robot with obstacle avoidance using single-camera vision and ultrasonic sensing. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 14(6), 969-978. doi:10.1109/70.736780Desouza, G. N., & Kak, A. C. (2002). Vision for mobile robot navigation: a survey. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 24(2), 237-267. doi:10.1109/34.982903Borenstein, J., Everett, H. R., Feng, L., & Wehe, D. (1997). Mobile robot positioning: Sensors and techniques. Journal of Robotic Systems, 14(4), 231-249. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-4563(199704)14:43.0.co;2-rBetke, M., & Gurvits, L. (1997). Mobile robot localization using landmarks. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 13(2), 251-263. doi:10.1109/70.563647Kuffner, J., Nishiwaki, K., Kagami, S., Inaba, M., & Inoue, H. (2005). Motion Planning for Humanoid Robots. Robotics Research. The Eleventh International Symposium, 365-374. doi:10.1007/11008941_39Lee, Y.-J., & Bien, Z. (2002). Path planning for a quadruped robot: an artificial field approach. Advanced Robotics, 16(7), 609-627. doi:10.1163/15685530260390746Petres, C., Pailhas, Y., Patron, P., Petillot, Y., Evans, J., & Lane, D. (2007). Path Planning for Autonomous Underwater Vehicles. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 23(2), 331-341. doi:10.1109/tro.2007.895057P. Raja. (2012). Optimal path planning of mobile robots: A review. International Journal of the Physical Sciences, 7(9). doi:10.5897/ijps11.1745Hart, P., Nilsson, N., & Raphael, B. (1968). A Formal Basis for the Heuristic Determination of Minimum Cost Paths. IEEE Transactions on Systems Science and Cybernetics, 4(2), 100-107. doi:10.1109/tssc.1968.300136Lozano-PĂ©rez, T., & Wesley, M. A. (1979). An algorithm for planning collision-free paths among polyhedral obstacles. Communications of the ACM, 22(10), 560-570. doi:10.1145/359156.359164Lozano-Perez. (1983). Spatial Planning: A Configuration Space Approach. IEEE Transactions on Computers, C-32(2), 108-120. doi:10.1109/tc.1983.1676196Brooks, R. A. (1983). Solving the find-path problem by good representation of free space. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, SMC-13(2), 190-197. doi:10.1109/tsmc.1983.6313112Schwartz, J. T., & Sharir, M. (1983). On the «piano movers» problem. II. General techniques for computing topological properties of real algebraic manifolds. Advances in Applied Mathematics, 4(3), 298-351. doi:10.1016/0196-8858(83)90014-3Kavraki LE. Random networks in configurations space for fast path planning. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Computer Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 1994.Kavraki, L. E., Latombe, J.-C., Motwani, R., & Raghavan, P. (1998). Randomized Query Processing in Robot Path Planning. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 57(1), 50-60. doi:10.1006/jcss.1998.1578Hsu, D., Kindel, R., Latombe, J.-C., & Rock, S. (2002). Randomized Kinodynamic Motion Planning with Moving Obstacles. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 21(3), 233-255. doi:10.1177/027836402320556421Kavraki, L. E., Svestka, P., Latombe, J.-C., & Overmars, M. H. (1996). Probabilistic roadmaps for path planning in high-dimensional configuration spaces. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 12(4), 566-580. doi:10.1109/70.508439Rubio, F., Valero, F., Sunyer, J., & Mata, V. (2009). Direct stepâbyâstep method for industrial robot path planning. Industrial Robot: An International Journal, 36(6), 594-607. doi:10.1108/01439910910994669Howard, T. M., & Kelly, A. (2007). Optimal Rough Terrain Trajectory Generation for Wheeled Mobile Robots. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 26(2), 141-166. doi:10.1177/0278364906075328Valero FJ. PlanificaciĂłn de trayectorias libres de obstĂĄculos para un manipulador plano. Doctoral Thesis, UPV, Spain, 1990.Valero, F., Mata, V., Cuadrado, J. I., & Ceccarelli, M. (1996). A formulation for path planning of manipulators in complex environments by using adjacent configurations. Advanced Robotics, 11(1), 33-56. doi:10.1163/156855397x00038Deb, K., Pratap, A., Agarwal, S., & Meyarivan, T. (2002). A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 6(2), 182-197. doi:10.1109/4235.996017Garcia, M. A. P., Montiel, O., Castillo, O., SepĂșlveda, R., & Melin, P. (2009). Path planning for autonomous mobile robot navigation with ant colony optimization and fuzzy cost function evaluation. Applied Soft Computing, 9(3), 1102-1110. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2009.02.014Miao, H., & Tian, Y.-C. (2013). Dynamic robot path planning using an enhanced simulated annealing approach. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 222, 420-437. doi:10.1016/j.amc.2013.07.022Bobrow, J. E., Dubowsky, S., & Gibson, J. S. (1985). Time-Optimal Control of Robotic Manipulators Along Specified Paths. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 4(3), 3-17. doi:10.1177/027836498500400301Kang Shin, & McKay, N. (1985). Minimum-time control of robotic manipulators with geometric path constraints. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 30(6), 531-541. doi:10.1109/tac.1985.1104009Kyriakopoulos, K. J., & Saridis, G. N. (s. f.). Minimum jerk path generation. Proceedings. 1988 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. doi:10.1109/robot.1988.12075Constantinescu, D., & Croft, E. A. (2000). Smooth and time-optimal trajectory planning for industrial manipulators along specified paths. Journal of Robotic Systems, 17(5), 233-249. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-4563(200005)17:53.0.co;2-yGasparetto, A., & Zanotto, V. (2010). Optimal trajectory planning for industrial robots. Advances in Engineering Software, 41(4), 548-556. doi:10.1016/j.advengsoft.2009.11.001JIANGdagger, Z.-P., & NIJMEIJER, H. (1997). Tracking Control of Mobile Robots: A Case Study in Backstepping**This paper was not presented at any IFAC meeting. This paper was recommended for publication in revised form by Associate Editor Alberto Isidori under the direction of Editor Tamer BaĆar. Automatica, 33(7), 1393-1399. doi:10.1016/s0005-1098(97)00055-1Klosowski, J. T., Held, M., Mitchell, J. S. B., Sowizral, H., & Zikan, K. (1998). Efficient collision detection using bounding volume hierarchies of k-DOPs. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 4(1), 21-36. doi:10.1109/2945.675649Mirtich B. V-Clip: fast and robust polyhedral collision detection. Technical Report TR97-05, Mitsubishi Electric Research Laboratory, 1997.Mohamed, E. F., El-Metwally, K., & Hanafy, A. R. (2011). An improved Tangent Bug method integrated with artificial potential field for multi-robot path planning. 2011 International Symposium on Innovations in Intelligent Systems and Applications. doi:10.1109/inista.2011.5946136Seder, M., & Petrovic, I. (2007). Dynamic window based approach to mobile robot motion control in the presence of moving obstacles. Proceedings 2007 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. doi:10.1109/robot.2007.363613Simmons, R. (s. f.). The curvature-velocity method for local obstacle avoidance. Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. doi:10.1109/robot.1996.51102
Robot Autonomy for Surgery
Autonomous surgery involves having surgical tasks performed by a robot
operating under its own will, with partial or no human involvement. There are
several important advantages of automation in surgery, which include increasing
precision of care due to sub-millimeter robot control, real-time utilization of
biosignals for interventional care, improvements to surgical efficiency and
execution, and computer-aided guidance under various medical imaging and
sensing modalities. While these methods may displace some tasks of surgical
teams and individual surgeons, they also present new capabilities in
interventions that are too difficult or go beyond the skills of a human. In
this chapter, we provide an overview of robot autonomy in commercial use and in
research, and present some of the challenges faced in developing autonomous
surgical robots
Embodied Evolution in Collective Robotics: A Review
This paper provides an overview of evolutionary robotics techniques applied
to on-line distributed evolution for robot collectives -- namely, embodied
evolution. It provides a definition of embodied evolution as well as a thorough
description of the underlying concepts and mechanisms. The paper also presents
a comprehensive summary of research published in the field since its inception
(1999-2017), providing various perspectives to identify the major trends. In
particular, we identify a shift from considering embodied evolution as a
parallel search method within small robot collectives (fewer than 10 robots) to
embodied evolution as an on-line distributed learning method for designing
collective behaviours in swarm-like collectives. The paper concludes with a
discussion of applications and open questions, providing a milestone for past
and an inspiration for future research.Comment: 23 pages, 1 figure, 1 tabl
Past, Present, and Future of Simultaneous Localization And Mapping: Towards the Robust-Perception Age
Simultaneous Localization and Mapping (SLAM)consists in the concurrent
construction of a model of the environment (the map), and the estimation of the
state of the robot moving within it. The SLAM community has made astonishing
progress over the last 30 years, enabling large-scale real-world applications,
and witnessing a steady transition of this technology to industry. We survey
the current state of SLAM. We start by presenting what is now the de-facto
standard formulation for SLAM. We then review related work, covering a broad
set of topics including robustness and scalability in long-term mapping, metric
and semantic representations for mapping, theoretical performance guarantees,
active SLAM and exploration, and other new frontiers. This paper simultaneously
serves as a position paper and tutorial to those who are users of SLAM. By
looking at the published research with a critical eye, we delineate open
challenges and new research issues, that still deserve careful scientific
investigation. The paper also contains the authors' take on two questions that
often animate discussions during robotics conferences: Do robots need SLAM? and
Is SLAM solved
Robotic Wireless Sensor Networks
In this chapter, we present a literature survey of an emerging, cutting-edge,
and multi-disciplinary field of research at the intersection of Robotics and
Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN) which we refer to as Robotic Wireless Sensor
Networks (RWSN). We define a RWSN as an autonomous networked multi-robot system
that aims to achieve certain sensing goals while meeting and maintaining
certain communication performance requirements, through cooperative control,
learning and adaptation. While both of the component areas, i.e., Robotics and
WSN, are very well-known and well-explored, there exist a whole set of new
opportunities and research directions at the intersection of these two fields
which are relatively or even completely unexplored. One such example would be
the use of a set of robotic routers to set up a temporary communication path
between a sender and a receiver that uses the controlled mobility to the
advantage of packet routing. We find that there exist only a limited number of
articles to be directly categorized as RWSN related works whereas there exist a
range of articles in the robotics and the WSN literature that are also relevant
to this new field of research. To connect the dots, we first identify the core
problems and research trends related to RWSN such as connectivity,
localization, routing, and robust flow of information. Next, we classify the
existing research on RWSN as well as the relevant state-of-the-arts from
robotics and WSN community according to the problems and trends identified in
the first step. Lastly, we analyze what is missing in the existing literature,
and identify topics that require more research attention in the future
- âŠ