Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
133 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Laser-to-Vehicle Extrinsic Calibration in Low-Observability Scenarios for Subsea Mapping (2402.14993v2)

Published 22 Feb 2024 in cs.RO

Abstract: Laser line scanners are increasingly being used in the subsea industry for high-resolution mapping and infrastructure inspection. However, calibrating the 3D pose of the scanner relative to the vehicle is a perennial source of confusion and frustration for industrial surveyors. This work describes three novel algorithms for laser-to-vehicle extrinsic calibration using naturally occurring features. Each algorithm makes a different assumption on the quality of the vehicle trajectory estimate, enabling good calibration results in a wide range of situations. A regularization technique is used to address low-observability scenarios frequently encountered in practice with large, rotationally stable subsea vehicles. Experimental results are provided for two field datasets, including the recently discovered wreck of the Endurance.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (26)
  1. “Consistency Based Error Evaluation for Deep Sea Bathymetric Mapping with Robotic Vehicles” In Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robot. and Autom., 2006, pp. 3568–3574 IEEE
  2. Paul Furgale, Joern Rehder and Roland Siegwart “Unified temporal and spatial calibration for multi-sensor systems” In Proc. IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf. Intell. Robots Syst., 2013, pp. 1280–1286 IEEE
  3. “Motion-based calibration of multimodal sensor extrinsics and timing offset estimation” In IEEE Trans. Robot. 32.5 IEEE, 2016, pp. 1215–1229
  4. Ashley Napier, Peter Corke and Paul Newman “Cross-calibration of push-broom 2D LIDARs and cameras in natural scenes” In Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robot. Autom., 2013, pp. 3679–3684 IEEE
  5. Will Maddern, Alastair Harrison and Paul Newman “Lost in translation (and rotation): Rapid extrinsic calibration for 2D and 3D LIDARs” In Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robot. Autom., 2012, pp. 3096–3102 IEEE
  6. Haoyang Ye, Yuying Chen and Ming Liu “Tightly coupled 3D lidar inertial odometry and mapping” In Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robot. Autom., 2019, pp. 3144–3150 IEEE
  7. “Targetless calibration of LiDAR-IMU system based on continuous-time batch estimation” In Proc. IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf. Intell. Robots Syst., 2020, pp. 9968–9975 IEEE
  8. Faraz M Mirzaei, Dimitrios G Kottas and Stergios I Roumeliotis “3D LIDAR–camera intrinsic and extrinsic calibration: Identifiability and analytical least-squares-based initialization” In Int. J. Robot. Res. 31.4 SAGE Publications Sage UK: London, England, 2012, pp. 452–467
  9. “LIC-fusion 2.0: LiDAR-inertial-camera odometry with sliding-window plane-feature tracking” In Proc. IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf. Intell. Robots Syst., 2020, pp. 5112–5119 IEEE
  10. “Observability-Aware Intrinsic and Extrinsic Calibration of LiDAR-IMU Systems” In IEEE Trans. Robot. 38.6 IEEE, 2022, pp. 3734–3753
  11. “Observability-aware online multi-lidar extrinsic calibration” In IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. IEEE, 2023
  12. Timothy D Barfoot “State Estimation for Robotics” Cambridge University Press, 2017
  13. Joan Sola, Jeremie Deray and Dinesh Atchuthan “A micro Lie theory for state estimation in robotics” In arXiv preprint arXiv:1812.01537, 2018
  14. Jonathan Arsenault “Practical Considerations and Extensions of the Invariant Extended Kalman Filtering Framework”, 2019
  15. “Underwater Laser Scanner: Ray-based Model and Calibration” In IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 24.5 IEEE, 2019, pp. 1986–1997
  16. “State of the art of underwater active optical 3D scanners” In Sensors 19.23 MDPI, 2019, pp. 5161
  17. Ethan Eade “Lie groups for computer vision”, 2014
  18. David G Lowe “Distinctive image features from scale-invariant keypoints” In Int. J. Comput. Vis. 60.2 Springer, 2004, pp. 91–110
  19. Heng Yang, Jingnan Shi and Luca Carlone “TEASER: Fast and Certifiable Point Cloud Registration” In IEEE Trans. Robot. 37.2 Springer, 2020, pp. 314–333
  20. Radu Bogdan Rusu, Nico Blodow and Michael Beetz “Fast point feature histograms (FPFH) for 3D registration” In Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robot. Autom., 2009, pp. 3212–3217 IEEE
  21. Thomas Hitchcox “Strategies for Subsea Navigation and Mapping Using an Underwater Laser Scanner”, 2023
  22. “Convex Optimization” Cambridge University Press, 2004
  23. Sean Anderson and Timothy D Barfoot “Full STEAM ahead: Exactly sparse Gaussian process regression for batch continuous-time trajectory estimation on S⁢E⁢(3)𝑆𝐸3SE(3)italic_S italic_E ( 3 )” In Proc. IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf. Intell. Robots Syst., 2015, pp. 157–164 IEEE
  24. Thomas Hitchcox and James Richard Forbes “Improving Self-Consistency in Underwater Mapping Through Laser-Based Loop Closure” In IEEE Trans. Robot. 39.3 IEEE, 2023, pp. 1873–1892
  25. Lasse Rabenstein “Endurance22 Cruise Scientific Report”, 2022
  26. Alfred Lansing “Endurance: Shackleton’s Incredible Voyage” Basic Books a Member of Perseus Books Group, 2014

Summary

  • The paper presents three novel calibration algorithms that enhance the precision of laser-to-vehicle alignment using Tikhonov regularization to incorporate weakly observable data.
  • It addresses a range of scenarios from perfect navigation to significant trajectory errors, with Algorithm 2 notably reducing point disparity error in challenging datasets.
  • The results improve high-resolution subsea mapping and offer practical insights for maritime inspections and infrastructure analysis in complex underwater environments.

Insights on Laser-to-Vehicle Extrinsic Calibration for Subsea Mapping

In recent efforts to enhance the application of laser line scanners in subsea environments, Hitchcox and Forbes propose novel calibration algorithms that address the persistent challenge of accurately determining the 3D pose of laser scanners relative to vehicles in low-observability scenarios. Their research, as presented in "Laser-to-Vehicle Extrinsic Calibration in Low-Observability Scenarios for Subsea Mapping," explores the calibration complexities and offers practical solutions through a robust framework that leverages naturally occurring features for effective mapping.

Key Contributions and Methodology

The authors present a suite of three algorithms designed to calibrate laser-to-vehicle extrinsics, with each algorithm tailored to different assumptions regarding the quality of the vehicle trajectory estimate:

  1. Algorithm 1 targets scenarios with perfect navigation. It assumes the vehicle trajectory is precisely known and therefore focuses on calibrating the laser-to-INS extrinsics solely.
  2. Algorithm 2 considers environments where the local navigation is accurate, but global drift is present. This situation is typical with high-quality DVL-INS systems without the aid of external localization corrections such as LBL or GPS. The algorithm not only calibrates extrinsics but also adjusts global submap poses to address cumulative trajectory drifts.
  3. Algorithm 3 is designed for contexts with poor navigation estimates, accommodating more flexible submaps. It benefits low-cost systems or those in intricate operational contexts where even local trajectory precision is compromised.

These approaches utilize a unique regularization technique to tackle low-observability, which is particularly challenging for rotationally stable vehicles that perform primarily planar movements. Unlike conventional methods that may disregard updates in poorly observable dimensions, the authors employ a Tikhonov regularization approach, thus incorporating weakly observable data where possible.

Experimental Validation

The methods are validated with experimental datasets, notably the challenging Wiarton Shipwreck dataset and the historically significant wreck of the Endurance. In the former, all three algorithms significantly reduced point disparity error, indicative of superior map quality; however, Algorithm 2 proved particularly effective, reflecting its robustness under modest assumptions about navigation precision.

The Endurance dataset demonstrated the practical application of these calibration techniques in extreme conditions, reinforcing the robustness of Algorithm 2. The refined calibration not only improved the alignment of the 3D map but also provided clearer visual data, which is crucial for historical and structural analysis.

Implications and Future Directions

The advancements detailed in this research have substantial implications for the subsea industry, where high-resolution mapping and infrastructure inspections are increasingly vital. Improved calibration leads to better data fidelity, impacting sectors like oil and gas exploration and maritime archaeology.

Future developments in this domain could expand upon these algorithms to tackle emergent challenges posed by even more unpredictable subsea terrains or by integrating with autonomous systems for real-time calibration and mapping. Enhancing adaptability and robustness against navigation errors remains a fertile area for ongoing research, potentially incorporating machine learning for dynamic calibration adjustments.

Ultimately, Hitchcox and Forbes contribute an essential framework that significantly enhances subsea mapping capabilities, reinforcing the importance of precise sensor-vehicular integrations in challenging operational environments. Their work sets a precedent for more reliable data acquisition critical to the modern and future needs of the subsea landscape.

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Youtube Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com