Difference between revisions of "Smart sensor"

From ISLAB/CAISR
(Created page with "{{StudentProjectTemplate |Summary=Social robot |Keywords=Social robot |TimeFrame=First half of 2018 |References=Scheeff M., Pinto J., Rahardja K., Snibbe S., Tow R. (2002) Exp...")
 
m (Marcoo moved page Social robot assistant to Smart sensor: project concept changed)
 
(4 intermediate revisions by one user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{StudentProjectTemplate
 
{{StudentProjectTemplate
|Summary=Social robot
+
|Summary=Small smart sensors
|Keywords=Social robot
+
|Keywords=Smart sensors, adaptation, sensors
 
|TimeFrame=First half of 2018
 
|TimeFrame=First half of 2018
|References=Scheeff M., Pinto J., Rahardja K., Snibbe S., Tow R. (2002) Experiences with Sparky, a Social Robot. In: Dautenhahn K., Bond A., Cañamero L., Edmonds B. (eds) Socially Intelligent Agents. Multiagent Systems, Artificial Societies, and Simulated Organizations, vol 3. Springer, Boston, MA
+
|References=Surya G. Nurzaman, Utku Culha, Luzius Brodbeck, Liyu Wang, Fumiya Iida. (2013) Active Sensing System with In Situ Adjustable Sensor Morphology. PLoS ONE 8(12):e84090. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0084090
Cynthia Breazeal. 2003 Emotion and sociable humanoid robots.. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 59(1-2):119-155
+
Robin R. Murphy. Dempster–Shafer Theory for Sensor Fusion in Autonomous Mobile Robots. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ROBOTICS AND AUTOMATION, VOL. 14, NO. 2, APRIL 1998 197.
|Prerequisites=Robotics projects require much development/time  
+
|Prerequisites=Projects involving both software, hardware, and electronics require much development/time
|Supervisor=Martin, maybe others
+
|Supervisor=Martin Cooney, Håkan Petterson
 +
|Author=Can Yang
 
|Level=Master
 
|Level=Master
|Status=Open
+
|Status=Ongoing
 
}}
 
}}
This is a stub which will be filled out later.
+
Goal: small smart sensors
-The general research area is social robotics, an applied area at the junction between robotics, pattern recognition, image processing, and human science.
+
 
Robots are increasingly being introduced into public and domestic settings to conduct various useful tasks for humans and alongside of humans.
+
Motivation:
For such technologies to perform effectively, it is crucial to ensure safety, trust, and acceptance.
+
Current sensors are "static", detecting just one thing, such as light, sound, or touch, because of which in complex systems such as vehicles or homes many sensors are typically required.
Toward this, researchers are aiming to facilitate mutual recognition of actions and intentions between humans and the autonomous systems.
+
A "smart" sensor which could dynamically adapt itself (to detect different signals) could replace multiple static sensors, leading to less space taken, less cost, less work for installations, a greater ability to operate when changes occur, and possibly even easier repairs (self-healing).
Recognition by robots can involve cameras, thermal cameras, and other kinds of sensors, and behavior generation is conducted to facilitate human recognition of robot actions and intentions.  
+
Alternatively, an ensemble of dynamic sensors could acquire more information than the same number of static sensors.
The challenge is human behaviors and intentions are complex and difficult to model, recognize, and generate.
+
Furthermore, if such sensors can be made small, various benefits would emerge: e.g., making arbitrary surfaces embedded with sensors for robots such as intelligent skin, and interesting tasks at the micro scale could potentially be facilitated, such as monitoring cells inside of a person.
-Students will mostly develop software, not hardware. Students will use an existing robot (probably Baxter, which will also be shared with other students and researchers as needed.)
+
 
Expected results: a thesis, code, video, etc (it would also be nice, but not required, if the students would be willing to also write a six page shortened version of the thesis, to be submitted to a conference)
+
Challenges:
 +
It is unknown how a sensor could be automatically changed into a different kind of sensor, a good strategy for changing a sensor or an ensemble of sensors, and how to achieve this at a small scale.
 +
 
 +
Approach:
 +
The student will  
 +
 
 +
-Design transitions between some typical sensors
 +
 
 +
-Design algorithms for calculating information/interestingness for each modality (possibly using change point detection) and for strategically allocating roles (like particles in a particle filter).
 +
 
 +
-Design a strategy for the micro scale
 +
 
 +
-Implement a macro-scale proof-of-concept, which can be switched manually or algorithmically, and a smaller proof-of-concept (mini, or micro; nano would be cool but would probably not be possible)
 +
 
 +
-Evaluate
 +
 
 +
-Thus, students will develop both software, and hardware/electronics
 +
 
 +
Expected result: some ideas (new knowledge) of how to adapt different sensors, at different scales. Thesis, prototypes, video, hopefully a paper, possibly other such as code

Latest revision as of 16:15, 1 February 2018

Title Smart sensor
Summary Small smart sensors
Keywords Smart sensors, adaptation, sensors
TimeFrame First half of 2018
References Surya G. Nurzaman, Utku Culha, Luzius Brodbeck, Liyu Wang, Fumiya Iida. (2013) Active Sensing System with In Situ Adjustable Sensor Morphology. PLoS ONE 8(12):e84090. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0084090

Robin R. Murphy. Dempster–Shafer Theory for Sensor Fusion in Autonomous Mobile Robots. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ROBOTICS AND AUTOMATION, VOL. 14, NO. 2, APRIL 1998 197.

Prerequisites Projects involving both software, hardware, and electronics require much development/time
Author Can Yang
Supervisor Martin Cooney, Håkan Petterson
Level Master
Status Ongoing


Goal: small smart sensors

Motivation: Current sensors are "static", detecting just one thing, such as light, sound, or touch, because of which in complex systems such as vehicles or homes many sensors are typically required. A "smart" sensor which could dynamically adapt itself (to detect different signals) could replace multiple static sensors, leading to less space taken, less cost, less work for installations, a greater ability to operate when changes occur, and possibly even easier repairs (self-healing). Alternatively, an ensemble of dynamic sensors could acquire more information than the same number of static sensors. Furthermore, if such sensors can be made small, various benefits would emerge: e.g., making arbitrary surfaces embedded with sensors for robots such as intelligent skin, and interesting tasks at the micro scale could potentially be facilitated, such as monitoring cells inside of a person.

Challenges: It is unknown how a sensor could be automatically changed into a different kind of sensor, a good strategy for changing a sensor or an ensemble of sensors, and how to achieve this at a small scale.

Approach: The student will

-Design transitions between some typical sensors

-Design algorithms for calculating information/interestingness for each modality (possibly using change point detection) and for strategically allocating roles (like particles in a particle filter).

-Design a strategy for the micro scale

-Implement a macro-scale proof-of-concept, which can be switched manually or algorithmically, and a smaller proof-of-concept (mini, or micro; nano would be cool but would probably not be possible)

-Evaluate

-Thus, students will develop both software, and hardware/electronics

Expected result: some ideas (new knowledge) of how to adapt different sensors, at different scales. Thesis, prototypes, video, hopefully a paper, possibly other such as code