 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
2004 Rescue Robot League CompetitionsNOTE: Click on a logo above to scroll down to that competition! RoboCupRescue
- U.S. Open
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
TEAM DESCRIPTION PAPERS
|
||
|
UNO (USA) |
||
2004 RoboCupRescue
U.S. Open Results and Competition Bracket
Figure 2: 2004 RoboCup US Open – Rescue Robot League Competitors
RoboCupRescue - World Championship
Lisbon, Portugal
June 27th – July 5th, 2004
Website: http://www.robocup2004.pt/
This year’s RoboCupRescue competition marked the
introduction of a new square competition configuration for the Real
Robot League. Not only were Portuguese versions of the NIST Arenas
constructed, but a separate operator station (that also contained
the robot tracking and wireless networking stations), a large team
setup area, and administration area were built (Figures 3a-3e).
Figure 3a: 2004 RoboCupRescue – Real Robot League Configuration
(Arenas, Operator Station/Team Setup Arena, and Multi-Media Display)
Figure 3b: 2004 RoboCupRescue – Real Robot League Arenas (Yellow,
Orange, and Red)
Figure 3c: 2004 RoboCupRescue – Red Arena
Figure 3d: 2004 RoboCupRescue – Orange Arena
Figure 3e: 2004 RoboCupRescue – Red Arena
This year’s team qualification process included over forty team description papers and regional open competitions in the USA and Japan. The league chairs and technical committee selected twenty teams from eight countries to compete, almost doubling last year’s participation. Overall, the league demonstrated a notable variety of robotic technologies for searching complex environments, finding simulated victims, and localizing and mapping their locations. The overall quality of the implementations was clearly improved from last year’s teams. Particularly innovative approaches provided break-through improvements in several key elements and will certainly be emulated in future implementations. All teams document their approaches completely in team description papers.
TEAM DESCRIPTION PAPERS |
|
| (JAPAN) NIIT-Blue |
|
2004
RoboCup - World Championship Results and Competition Bracket
Figure 4: 2004 RoboCup – Real Rescue Robot League Competitors
1st Place: The Toin Pelicans team, from the University
of Toin, Japan, were mainly recognized for their very capable, multi-tracked
mobility platform with independent front and rear flippers. Their
innovative camera perspective mounted above and behind the robot –
so as to contain the entire robot and surrounding area within the
field of view – provided superior remote situational awareness
for the operator, and allowed precise configuration management of
the robot’s tracks to facilitate mobility over large obstacles
and within confined spaces. Other teams used similar overview cameras,
some on flexible rods, also to good effect.
2nd Place: The Kurt3D team, from the Fraunhofer Institute for
Artificial Intelligence Systems, Germany, were mainly recognized for
their application of state-of-the-art 3D mapping techniques using
a tilting line scan ladar within the complex environment of the arenas.
3rd Place: The ALCOR team, from the University of Rome “La
Sapienza,” Italy, were mainly recognized for their intelligent
perception algorithms for victim identification and mapping.
The league’s goals were clearly achieved this year
by evaluating state-of-the-art technologies, methods, and algorithms
applied to search and rescue robots through objective testing in relevant
environments, statistically significant repetitions, and comprehensive
data collection. Although several teams demonstrated clear advances
in certain key capabilities, more collaboration between teams (and
between countries) is needed to produce ultimately effective systems
for deployment. When viewed as a stepping-stone between the laboratory
and the real world, this competition provided an important opportunity
to foster such collaborative efforts and further raised expectations
for next year’s implementations.
AAAI Rescue
San Jose California, USA
July 25th – 29th, 2004
Website: http://palantir.swarthmore.edu/aaai04/
The AAAI 2004 Conference continued to use the NIST transportable arenas to host the fifth annual Rescue Robot League Competition in San Jose, California, USA (Figures 5a-5e).
Figure 5a: AAAI - 2004 – Rescue Robot League Arenas (Overall
Configuration)
Figure 5b: AAAI - 2004 – Rescue Robot League Arenas (Yellow,
Orange, Red)
Figure 5c: AAAI - 2004 – Rescue Robot League Yellow Arena
Figure 5d: AAAI - 2004 – Rescue Robot League Orange Arena
Figure 5e: AAAI - 2004 – Rescue Robot League Red Arena
This year’s seven competing teams developed unique systems with very diverse characteristics. Three Place Awards and an Innovation Award were presented at this year’s competition. The awardees are shown in Figure 6. The Place Awards were based solely on the teams’ performances during the competition missions. The Innovation Award was given to the team exhibiting a particularly novel implementation or technical advancement.
2004 AAAI Rescue Results and Competition Bracket
Figure 6: AAAI - 2004 – Rescue Robot League Teams
1st Place: The Swarthmore College team, from
Swarthmore, PA, deployed two robots controlled by a single operator
to explore the arenas. Their human-robot interface allowed the operator
to adjust the level of autonomy of each robot to effectively manage
concurrent exploration of the yellow and orange arenas. Once they
found a victim, their mapping system enabled the operator to record
the necessary victim data in an on-line form, include images of the
victim’s situation and surrounding environment, and effectively
note the location on the map. They used this system to locate and
map victims more quickly than the other teams, and so scored very
well in each of their missions.
2nd Place: The MITRE team, from McLean, VA, deployed three
semi-autonomous robots controlled by a single operator. They demonstrated
multiple robot control by integrating semi-autonomous teaming behaviors
to explore the yellow and orange arenas and an effective custom interface.
The three robots were similarly equipped with sensors for laser ranging,
infrared proximity, sonar, and bumpers for navigation and mapping.
To find victims they used custom pyro-electric sensors to detect body
heat, along with a color pan-tilt-zoom camera. They were particularly
noted for their approach to simultaneous localization and mapping
(SLAM), with fused sensor data from all three robots displayed on
a single map accurately showing the location of victims and obstacles.
This team’s mapping implementation earned an Innovation Award
as well.
3rd Place: The Palo Alto Research Center (PARC)
team, from Palo Alto, CA, competed with custom built robotic systems
predominantly developed by high school students associated with their
Institute for Educational Advancement. This team implemented two different
modular serpentine designs, each teleoperated via tether, and an innovative
localization approach. Equipped with cameras and microphones, these
were the only robots to explore the extremely confined spaces within
the rubble-strewn red arena. The system also included a tank-like
robot that deployed sensor motes for map creation.
Other participating teams demonstrated a wide variety of implementations
(see Figure 3). The team from the University of New Orleans, LA, used
a small, field deployable, tracked vehicle equipped with a color camera,
thermal camera, and two-way audio. Its tether transmitted power along
with video and audio to a hardened control unit used by the operator,
while a second operator performed tether management from the point
of entry into the collapse. Teams from the Utah State University,
UT, and the University of Manitoba, Canada, developed fully autonomous,
custom robot implementations for the competition. These teams attempted
to deploy inexpensive technologies that could be easily replicated,
deployed in swarms, and considered expendable during search operations.
The Scarabs team from Los Angeles, CA, implemented a custom-built
tracked robot.
Any Questions?
If you would like additional information on these past Rescue Robot Competitions, please send an email to rescue.robot.league@nist.gov
isd-webmaster@cme.nist.gov
Date Created: January 6, 2005
Last updated: January 18, 2005