Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Range-based relative localization using a fixed number of measurements

  • Original Research Paper
  • Published:
Intelligent Service Robotics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Storms block the global positioning system and reduce visibility. The key to success in rescuing a wrecked robot is to find it first; however, in hostile territory, broadcasting distress signals is not an option. In this paper, we design an iterative algorithm for a rescue robot that identifies the relative pose of a wrecked robot using five range measurements and communications at different time points. Just as architects build real frameworks to hold up a building, we use the above information as building blocks to construct a hypothetical geometric framework, which consists of vertices bounded by straight, stiff edges. Then, the relative pose can be calculated from the coordinates of vertices in the framework. Theoretical analysis shows that measuring and communicating four or more times can form only one framework; thus, this framework provides one relative pose. Therefore, we use only one more measurement than the theoretical lower bound. To restrain noise, we suppress the fact that there are many possible frameworks. The algorithm finds a framework whose edge lengths are close to the expectations of the edge lengths of these frameworks. The algorithm is guaranteed to give an error-bounded estimate with an adjustable possibility rather than gradually stabilizing estimates or numerous possible estimates. The entire positioning scheme contains no matrix operations and does not require a polynomial toolbox. Additionally, this approach requires no prior information of the relative pose, no coordinated motion of the two robots, and no parameter must be adjusted through experience. In summary, a robot in distress can be located if five range measurements and communications can be performed between the two robots.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gilmour JH, Godleski JS, Carter RL et al (1992) Aircraft rendezvous using low data rate two-way TACAN bearing information. U.S. Patent 5,128,873

  2. Uttam BJ, Amos DH, Covino JM et al (2007) Terrestrial radio-navigation systems. Kayton M, Fried WR Avionics navigation systems, 2nd edn. Wiley: Hoboken, pp 99–177

  3. Freitag L, Grund M, Singh S et al (2005) The WHOI micro-modem: An acoustic communications and navigation system for multiple platforms. In: Proceedings of OCEANS MTS/IEEE, Vol. 2, pp 1086–1092

  4. Xu B, Xiao YP, Gao W et al (2014) Dual-model reverse CKF algorithm in cooperative navigation for USV. Math Probl Eng https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/186785

  5. Webster SE, Walls JM, Whitcomb LL (2013) Decentralized extended information filter for single-beacon cooperative acoustic navigation: theory and experiments. IEEE Trans Robot 29(4):957–974. https://doi.org/10.1109/TRO.2013.2252857

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Martinelli A, Siegwart R (2005) Observability analysis for mobile robot localization. In: Proceedings of IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, pp 1471–1476

  7. Nilsson JO, Handel P (2013) Recursive bayesian initialization of localization based on ranging and dead reckoning. In: Proceedings of IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, pp 1399–1404

  8. Strader J, Gu Y, Gross JN et al (2016) Cooperative relative localization for moving UAVs with single link range measurements. In: Proceedings of IEEE/ION position, location and navigation symposium, pp 336–343

  9. Trawny N, Roumeliotis SI (2010) On the global optimum of planar, range-based robot-to-robot relative pose estimation. In: IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, pp 3200–3206

  10. Cornejo A, Nagpal R (2015) Distributed range-based relative localization of robot swarms. Springer Tracts Adv Robot 107:91–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16595-0_6

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Zhou XS, Roumeliotis SI (2008) Robot-to-robot relative pose estimation from range measurements. IEEE Trans Robot 24(6):1379–1393. https://doi.org/10.1109/TRO.2008.2006251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Evensen G (2009) Data assimilation: the ensemble Kalman filter, 2nd edn. Springer, Bergen

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Aliev FA, Ozbek L (1999) Evaluation of convergence rate in the central limit theorem for the Kalman filter. IEEE Trans Autom Control 44(10):1905–1909. https://doi.org/10.1109/9.793734

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Delyon B (2001) A note on uniform observability. IEEE Trans Autom Control 46(8):1326–1327. https://doi.org/10.1109/9.940944

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Dulmage J, Cioffi R, Fitz MP et al (2010) Characterization of distance error with received signal strength ranging. In: Proceedings of IEEE wireless communications and networking conference, pp 1–6

  16. Jackson B, Jordán T, Szabadka Z (2006) Globally linked pairs of vertices in equivalent realizations of graphs. Discrete Comput Geom 35(3):493–512. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00454-005-1225-8

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Mesbahi M, Egerstedt M (2010) Graph theoretic methods in multiagent networks. Princeton University Press, Princeton. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0703993104

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Jackson B, Jordán T, Szabadka Z (2014) Globally linked pairs of vertices in rigid frameworks. Robert C. Asia IW and Walter W Rigidity and symmetry. Springer, New York, pp 177–203

  19. Gluck H (1975) Almost all simply connected closed surfaces are rigid. In: Proceedings of geometric topology conference, pp 225–239

  20. Alfakih AY (2014) Local, dimensional and universal rigidities: a unified gram matrix approach. Robert C. Asia IW and Walter W Rigidity and symmetry. Springer, New York, pp 41–60

  21. Steven JG, Alexander DH, Dylan PT (2010) Characterizing generic global rigidity. Am J Math 132(4):897–939. https://doi.org/10.1353/ajm.0.0132

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Jackson B, Jordán T (2005) Connected rigidity matroids and unique realizations of graphs. J Comb Theory Ser B 94(1):1–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jctb.2004.11.002

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Jacobs DJ, Hendrickson B (1997) An algorithm for two-dimensional rigidity percolation: the pebble game. J Comput Phys 137(2):346–365. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcph.1997.5809

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Edwin O (2004) A primer on odometry and motor control. https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and-computer-science/6-186-mobile-autonomous-systems-laboratory-january-iap-2005/study-materials/odomtutorial.pdf. Accessed 2018–3–15

  25. Diao Y, Hu G, Marelli D et al (2014) Cooperative localization of a cascading quadrilateral network. In: Proceedings of 11th IEEE international conference on control & automation (ICCA), pp 13–18

  26. Eren T, Goldenberg DK, Whiteley W et al (2004) Rigidity, computation, and randomization in network localization. In: Proceedings of twenty-third annual joint conference of the IEEE computer and communications societies, pp 2673–2684

  27. Naraghi-Pour M, Rojas GC (2014) A novel algorithm for distributed localization in wireless sensor networks. ACM Trans Sens Netw 11(1):1–25. https://doi.org/10.1145/2632150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Strydom R, Thurrowgood S, Srinivasan MV (2014) Visual odometry: autonomous UAV navigation using optic flow and stereo. In: Proceedings of Australasian conference on robotics & automation

  29. Mouats T, Aouf N, Chermak L et al (2015) Thermal stereo odometry for UAVs. IEEE Sens J 15(11):6335–6347. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSEN.2015.2456337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Scaramuzza BD, Fraundorfer F, Fraundorfer BF (2011) IEEE Robot Autom Mag. Visual odometry 18:80–92

    Google Scholar 

  31. Papoulis A, Pillai SU (2002) One function of two random variables. In: Probability, random variables, and stochastic processes, 4th edn. The McGraw-Hill Companies, pp 190–192

  32. Arfken GB, Weber HJ, Harris FE (2013) Probability and statistics. In: Mathematical methods for physicists, 7th edn. Academic Press, pp 1125–1179.

  33. Ploskas N, Samaras N (2016) Parallel computing toolbox. In: GPU program MATLAB, Todd Green, pp 37–70.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Information Engineering, Zhejiang University of Technology, 288 Liuhe Road, Hangzhou, 310023, Zhejiang, People’s Republic of China

    Lin Zhang

  2. Zhejiang University of Technology, 288 Liuhe Road, Hangzhou, 310023, Zhejiang, People’s Republic of China

    Li Yu

Authors
  1. Lin Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Li Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lin Zhang.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

See Figs. 6, 7 and 8.

Fig. 6
figure 6

The histogram and kernel density estimation of error along x direction under different noise levels (full data). The true relative position and orientation of the target varied randomly within \(\left[ -9,9 \right] \) and \(\left[ 0,2\pi \right) \) for each experiment. In Algorithm 1, \(\iota \) and \(\varUpsilon \) were 1e-6 and 100, respectively. The stop condition \(\tau \) was calculated from (42) with \(m=1.93\). We completed 105 trials for each noise level

Full size image
Fig. 7
figure 7

The histogram and kernel density estimation of error along y direction under different noise levels (full data). The true relative position and orientation of the target varied randomly within \(\left[ -9,9 \right] \) and \(\left[ 0,2\pi \right) \) for each experiment. In Algorithm 1, \(\iota \) and \(\varUpsilon \) were 1e-6 and 100, respectively. The stop condition \(\tau \) was calculated from (42) with \(m=1.93\). We completed 105 trials for each noise level

Full size image
Fig. 8
figure 8

The histogram and kernel density estimation of error along \(\phi \) direction under different noise levels (full data). The true relative position and orientation of the target varied randomly within \(\left[ -9,9 \right] \) and \(\left[ 0,2\pi \right) \) for each experiment. In Algorithm 1, \(\iota \) and \(\varUpsilon \) were 1e-6 and 100, respectively. The stop condition \(\tau \) was calculated from (42) with \(m=1.93\). We completed 105 trials for each noise level

Full size image

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, L., Yu, L. Range-based relative localization using a fixed number of measurements. Intel Serv Robotics 12, 69–86 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11370-018-0261-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11370-018-0261-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation