Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

IEEE-RAS Standing Committee for Standards Activities Raj Madhavan, Ph.D. Chair, RAS Standing Committee for Standards Activities (SCSA) Associate VP, Industrial.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "IEEE-RAS Standing Committee for Standards Activities Raj Madhavan, Ph.D. Chair, RAS Standing Committee for Standards Activities (SCSA) Associate VP, Industrial."— Presentation transcript:

1 IEEE-RAS Standing Committee for Standards Activities Raj Madhavan, Ph.D. Chair, RAS Standing Committee for Standards Activities (SCSA) Associate VP, Industrial Activities Board VP-Elect, IAB (2012-2013) raj.madhavan@ieee.org http://ieee-ras.org/industrial/standards Institute for Systems Research, University of Maryland, College Park & Intelligent Systems Division, National Institute of Standards and Technology RAS-SCSA Meeting San Francisco USA Sept. 30 2011

2 Standardization – Why should we care?  Standards are crucial for driving industry innovation and fostering technology transfer  Lack of cohesion in the community hinders the progress in many domains (e.g. manufacturing, service, healthcare, and security, …)  Critical enablers for wider acceptance and proliferation of existing and emerging technologies  The lack of ways to quantify and characterize technologies and systems also hinders adoption of new systems  Users don’t trust claims by developers  There is lack of knowledge about how to match a solution with a problem  Users may be reluctant to try a new technology for fear of expensive failure: Think of the “graveyards” of unused equipment in some places RAS-SCSA Meeting San Francisco USA Sept. 30 2011

3 The scope of the activities of the IEEE RAS Standing Committee for Standard Activities is to formally adopt and confirm best practice in robotics and automation as standards. Within this scope the RAS Standing Committee for Standards Activities shall pursue the following objectives: promote common measures and definitions in robotics and automation promote measurability and comparability of robotics and automation technology promote integratability, portability and reusability of robotics and automation technology _________ Operating Procedures and Policies of the IEEE RAS Committee for Standard Activities Date: 05.04.2007 Scope and Objectives of the Sponsor RAS-SCSA Meeting San Francisco USA Sept. 30 2011

4 The Sponsor shall be responsible for the following: Initiating and promoting the development of IEEE standards within its scope by appointing appropriate working entities (subgroups) and overseeing their work Initiating and overseeing ballots of proposed IEEE standards within its scope Maintaining the standards developed by the Sponsor in accordance with the IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual Responding to requests for interpretations of the standards developed by the Sponsor Acting on other matters requiring Sponsor effort as provided in these procedures Cooperating with other appropriate standards development organizations Protecting against actions taken in the name of the Sponsor without committee authorization Responsibilities of the Sponsor RAS-SCSA Meeting San Francisco USA Sept. 30 2011

5 Work with other SDOs Standards Developing Organizations (SDOs) IEEE Standards e.g. 802.11 for wireless communications ISO: International Standards Organization e.g ISO TC184 (Automation Systems and Integration) Robotic Industries Association (RIA): Emphasis on safety related requirements through R15.06 Robot Safety Committee and robot system integration Robotics Domain Taskforce of Object Management Group (OMG): Focus is on modularization of robotic systems and standardization of robotic technology components Joint Architecture for Unmanned Systems (JAUS) is under the purview of SAE ASTM E54.08 Subcommittee: Performance standards for USAR robots AS-4 Unmanned Systems TC (USTC): Autonomy Level for Unmanned Systems (ALFUS) RAS-SCSA Meeting San Francisco USA Sept. 30 2011

6 Two Study Groups (SGs):  Map Data Representation: The objectives of this SG are to study existing map data representation(s) and discuss how to represent, encode, and exchange map data for robot navigation via standardized data exchange formats to enable efficient and proper use in robot software frameworks.  Glossary/Ontology for Robotics and Automation: The objectives of this SG are to identify, develop, and document salient terms and their definitions so that it can serve as a common reference for the R&A community.  Study Group Docs. was made available for public release in February 2011 and formation of a Working Group is being coordinated with IEEE-Standards Association by June 2011.  A full day Standards Meeting/WS to coincide with the first day of the 2011 ICRA (Shanghai) and 2011 IROS (San Francisco) workshops approved by RAS AdCom. RAS-SCSA Study Groups “RAS-SCSA : History and Recent Activities”, R. Madhavan, W. Yu, G. Biggs, C. Schlenoff, and H-M. Hui, Journal of the Robotics Society of Japan, Special Issue on Internationalization of Robot Technologies, May 2011. RAS-SCSA Meeting San Francisco USA Sept. 30 2011

7 PAR Submissions & Timeline (1/1) Two Project Authorization Requests (PARs) have been submitted: The goal of the Ontologies for Robotics and Automation Working Group is to develop a methodology for knowledge representation and reasoning in robotics and automation, together with the representation of concepts in an initial set of application domains, to allow for unambiguous knowledge transfer among any group of human, robots, and other artificial systems. The purpose of this standard is to define a common representation for robot map data, including metric and topological maps. It is intended to facilitate interoperability among different navigating robots, extending operational range and application areas of the robots. In addition, this standard is to provide a simple, unified way of maintaining, updating, and revising robot maps, while facilitating technological advancement for spatial mapping carried out by robots and/or other relevant devices. RAS-SCSA Meeting San Francisco USA Sept. 30 2011

8 PAR Submissions & Timeline (2/2) Submitted Sept. 15 th (Raj Madhavan: Standards Coordinator) [ORA P1872] Ontologies for Robotics and Automation (Craig Schlenoff) [MDR P1873] Robot Map Data Representation (Wonpil Yu & Geoff Biggs) NesCom Meeting Oct. 28 th (already on the agenda) Working Group will be established after PAR approval RAS-SCSA Meeting San Francisco USA Sept. 30 2011

9 Sept. 26 th 2011 Meeting Agenda 0900-0915 Welcome and Introduction (Raj Madhavan) 0915-0945 IEEE Standards Association (Laurie Policastro & Sue Vogel) 0945-1030 ORA WG - Overview of group, related efforts, discussion of sub-groups (Craig Schlenoff) 1030-1100 Coffee Break 1100-1130 ORA WG - Overview of Upper Ontology subgroup including linguistic framework (Edson Prestes) 1130-1230 ORA WG Discussion - Topic areas: Review of PAR, identifying other efforts we can leverage, discussion of representational approaches 1230-1330 Lunch 1330-1400 MDR WG Introduction, Past activities & Discussion (Wonpil Yu & Geoffrey Biggs) 1400-1445 Review of existing standards from other SDOs & Discussion (Hyungpil Moon) 1445-1530 Glossary for robot map data representation & Discussion (To be assigned) 1530-1600 Coffee Break 1600-1645 MDR WG discussion (Wonpil Yu & Geoffrey Biggs) 1645-1700 Wrap-up (Raj Madhavan) RAS-SCSA Meeting San Francisco USA Sept. 30 2011

10 ORA Discussion: AM Session Craig Schlenoff started by giving an overview of the goal and scope of the study group, along with a brief tutorial on ontologies and knowledge representation in general. He described the structure of the study group, including the three subgroups that were formed (Upper Ontology/Framework subgroup, Autonomous Robots Ontology subgroup, and Service Robots Ontology subgroup). Edson Prestes, one of the leads of the Upper Ontology/Methodology group, gave a presentation describing the direction describing his views of the future direction of that subgroup. This included some thoughts on which upper ontology to use (SUMO was proposed) and how to ensure consistency of the ontology structure. Craig Schlenoff then continued with a presentation describing some related robotics ontology efforts that he was aware of and/or involved with. A discussion ensued which focused on the use of the robot ontology once it was developed as well as the formalism to use in modeling the ontology. Initial consensus focused on using the ontology as a reference that humans and/or robots could point to when using terms. It was generally agreed that using the ontology as the underlying representation for the robot would not be a good idea since ontologies generally do not lend well to real-time applications (e.g., 100 Hz processing). In addition, OWL (Web Ontology Language) was suggested as the ontology language to use when representing the concepts. Both of the proposed solutions will be presented to the group mailing list to achieve wider consensus. RAS-SCSA Meeting San Francisco USA Sept. 30 2011

11 MDR Discussion: PM Session (1/1) Good participation from industry, giving valuable input on the practicalities of maps in mobile robots. The title of the working group shall be changed to "Robot Map Data Representation for Navigation" to clarify the goals. The scope shall be updated to note that only static maps will be considered for the exchange format. Several decisions proposed, which will be confirmed after comment from mailing list participants: The standard will restrict itself to 2D maps in order to minimise complexity. 3D maps will be considered in a future revision. Human-in-the-loop issues are considered external to the standard. These issues are more about visualisation of map data rather than the data format used. The standard shall focus on an exchange format that can be used between vendors and between software systems, and between software component within a single robot system. Internal formats are considered too application-specific. The standard shall specify the software interfaces (API) used to retrieve map data. The API shall be specified at a meta-level. Specific API implementations may be specified, based on need. The scope of the API is to be decided. RAS-SCSA Meeting San Francisco USA Sept. 30 2011

12 MDR Discussion: PM Session (2/2) What information must be stored in the map needs to be determined. The stored information will have an impact on possible applications, and so must be carefully considered. The OGC has produced specifications for map data. These need to be tested for their validity in robotics. It is expected that they will not contain sufficient data to be directly usable without extensions. Dr Xing Zhang from PARC will investigate these specifications. RAS-SCSA Meeting San Francisco USA Sept. 30 2011


Download ppt "IEEE-RAS Standing Committee for Standards Activities Raj Madhavan, Ph.D. Chair, RAS Standing Committee for Standards Activities (SCSA) Associate VP, Industrial."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google