Beobot 2.0: Cluster architecture for mobile robotics

  • Authors:
  • Christian Siagian;Chin-Kai Chang;Randolph Voorhies;Laurent Itti

  • Affiliations:
  • Department of Computer Science, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California 90089;Department of Computer Science, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California 90089;Department of Computer Science, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California 90089;Department of Computer Science, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California 90089

  • Venue:
  • Journal of Field Robotics
  • Year:
  • 2011

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

With the recent proliferation of robust but computationally demanding robotic algorithms, there is now a need for a mobile robot platform equipped with powerful computing facilities. In this paper, we present the design and implementation of Beobot 2.0, an affordable research-level mobile robot equipped with a cluster of 16 2.2-GHz processing cores. Beobot 2.0 uses compact Computer on Module (COM) processors with modest power requirements, thus accommodating various robot design constraints while still satisfying the requirement for computationally intensive algorithms. We discuss issues involved in utilizing multiple COM Express modules on a mobile platform, such as interprocessor communication, power consumption, cooling, and protection from shocks, vibrations, and other environmental hazards such as dust and moisture. We have applied Beobot 2.0 to the following computationally demanding tasks: laser-based robot navigation, scale-invariant feature transform (SIFT) object recognition, finding objects in a cluttered scene using visual saliency, and vision-based localization, wherein the robot has to identify landmarks from a large database of images in a timely manner. For the last task, we tested the localization system in three large-scale outdoor environments, which provide 3,583, 6,006, and 8,823 test frames, respectively. The localization errors for the three environments were 1.26, 2.38, and 4.08 m, respectively. The per-frame processing times were 421.45, 794.31, and 884.74 ms respectively, representing speedup factors of 2.80, 3.00, and 3.58 when compared to a single dual-core computer performing localization. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.