rockin camp 2014 report finalrockinrobotchallenge.eu/rockin_d5.2.pdf · rockin camp 2014 has been...

1""

"

"

"

RoCKIn - Robot Competitions Kick Innovation in Cognitive Systems and Robotics

FP7-ICT-601012"

Grant Agreement Number: 601012 Funding Period: 01.01.2013 - 31.12.2015

Instrument: Coordination and Support Action"

"

RoCKIn Camp 2014 Report""

Editors:

Daniele Nardi and Alberto Pretto

Contributors: Aamir Ahmad, Emanuele Bastianelli, Jakob Berghofer, Graham Buchanan, Roberto Capobianco, Giulio Fontana, Frederik Hegger, Luca Iocchi, Gerhard K. Kraetzschmar, Pedro U. Lima and Matteo Matteucci

"

"

"

" "

"

"

Lead"Contractor"for"this"deliverable:"Due"date"of"deliverable:"Actual"submission"date:"Dissemination"level:"Revision:"

Università"degli"Studi"di"Roma""La"Sapienza""July"31,"2014"July"31,"2014"Public"1.0"

3""

1 ABSTRACT((

RoCKIn is an European Union funded project (http://rockinrobotchallenge.eu) aiming to promote and improve scientific progress and innovation in robotics and cognitive systems by means of the design and implementation of robotics competitions, based on challenges concerning domestic service robots (RoCKIn@Home) and industrial robots in factories (RoCKIn@Work)."

RoCKIn competitions take inspiration from the RoboCup counterparts, adding however a strong emphasis in the integration of benchmarking technology with the competition concept."

RoCKIn Camps should be considered as events in preparation of the RoCKIn competitions. They are conceived as summer schools, while putting a special emphasis on the hands-on experience of the participants, who are organized in teams focused on the implementation of specific components whose performances are evaluated through specific benchmarking tools."

From 26 to 30 January 2014, Sapienza University organized in Rome the RoCKIn Camp 2014. This camp has been specifically organized in order to support the preparation of (preferably new) teams to participate in the RoCKIn competition events that are planned by RoCKIn in 2014 and 2015. The RoCKIn Camp 2014 has been structured as a 5-days school with many practical activities and a final demonstration. The RoCKIn Camp 2014, that was awarded an additional financial contribution from IEEE RAS-TEP program support, was attended by 63 students and researchers from 13 countries that were all accommodated at the expense of the organization and granted with some travel support. "

This report provides a description of the activities related to the organization, attendance and outcomes of the RoCKIn Camp 2014 Event, comprehensive of an analysis of the feedback gathered from participants.

( (

4""

2 CONTENTS(1" Abstract(.....................................................................................................................................................................................................(3"

3" Premise(.....................................................................................................................................................................................................(5"

4" Introduction(............................................................................................................................................................................................(6"

5" RoCKIn(Camp(2014(organization(..................................................................................................................................................(9"

5.1" Participants(....................................................................................................................................................................................(9"

5.1.1" The(selection(process(........................................................................................................................................................(9"

5.1.2" Accepted(participants(......................................................................................................................................................(10"

5.2" Venue,(accommodation(and(social(events(......................................................................................................................(10"

5.3" Other(financial(support(...........................................................................................................................................................(11"

6" RoCKIn(Camp(2014(program(........................................................................................................................................................(13"

6.1" Preliminary(work(.......................................................................................................................................................................(13"

6.2" Camp(program(description(....................................................................................................................................................(14"

6.2.1" Theoretical(lectures(.........................................................................................................................................................(14"

6.2.2" Practical(Sessions(..............................................................................................................................................................(16"

6.2.3" Final(demonstration(.........................................................................................................................................................(18"

6.3" Awards(............................................................................................................................................................................................(18"

7" RoCKIn(Camp(2014(Evaluation(....................................................................................................................................................(20"

7.1" Camp's(organization(and(facilities(......................................................................................................................................(20"

7.2" Technical(Program(....................................................................................................................................................................(20"

7.3" Overall(Satisfaction(...................................................................................................................................................................(20"

8" Appendix(A(............................................................................................................................................................................................(22"

8.1" Teams(and(participants(list(...................................................................................................................................................(22"

9" Appendix(B(............................................................................................................................................................................................(27"

9.1" Camp(schedule(............................................................................................................................................................................(27"

10" Appendix((C(.........................................................................................................................................................................................(31"

10.1" Final(demonstration(descriptions(....................................................................................................................................(31"

10.2" @home(teams(...........................................................................................................................................................................(31"

10.3" @work(teams(............................................................................................................................................................................(32"

11" Appendix(D(.........................................................................................................................................................................................(34"

11.1" Questionnaires(..........................................................................................................................................................................(34"

(

( (

5""

3 PREMISE("

RoCKIn is a three years EU-funded Coordinated Action consisting of robot competitions, symposiums, educational RoCKIn camps and technology transfer workshops. Robotics needs now an impetus that brings existing appealing prototypes from research laboratories to actual products in the mass market. One of the driving forces for such a significant and long-awaited technology transfer to happen is to focus the research in robotics on integrated systems that address and solve grand challenges. Obviously, the goal is not simply to realize a robotic system engineered to solve that particular challenge, but to develop formal methods that enable systematic approaches to building better and smarter robots in a given class of applications, benchmarked against building blocks common to most grand challenges for robots. It was on this basis that RoCKIn was formed."

RoCKIn major goals are:"

• developing standardised testbeds and benchmarks that will streamline R&D for the future;(

• focusing on cognitive skills and networked robots;(

• acting as a catalyst for smarter, more dependable robots.(

RoCKIn pursuits these goals by leveraging on different aspects:"

• scientific dissemination, through the participation at conferences and major events;(

• releasing a benchmarking framework;(

• designing testbeds adopted by the whole robotic community;(

• organizing competition events to evaluate robotic teams through standard benchmarks and

testbeds;(

• introducing teams to RoCKIn competitions through Camps.(

This latter activity represents one of the main components inside the RoCKIn project. This report describes the RoCKIn Camp 2014, that followed the first RoCKIn event, that is the RoCKIn Introductory Camp 2013."

( "

6""

4 INTRODUCTION((

The RoCKIn Camp 2014, organized by UNIROMA1 and held in Rome from 26 to 30 January 2014, has been designed as a hands-on weekly school, to kick-off the development of the teams of the RoCKIn@Home and RoCKIn@Work competitions. This camp followed the first event, organized in Eindhoven, June 2013, whose goal was to expose the interested participants to the competition environments and create a community. The link between the two events is demonstrated by a significant number of attendees of the first camp that entered the RoCKIn Camp 2014 with a team.

A note about the RoCKIn Camp 2014 has been included in the "IEEE RAS Education Activities" section of the IEEE Robotics & Automation magazine1."

!Figure'1:''The'RoCKIn'Camp'2014'participants'for'the'@Home'track'with'the'camp'staff'

"

Figure'2:'The'RoCKIn'Camp'2014'participants'for'the'@Work'track'with'the'camp'staff

(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( (((((((((((((((((((((1"IEEE"Robotics"and"Automation"Magazine,"21(2):"94R97,"June"2014."

7""

The RoCKIn Camp 2014 has been structured as a 5-days school with a significant amount of practical activities and a final demonstration day.""

The first day started with some presentations of the camp and the RoCKIn project, and the presentation of the basic software tools used in the camp. Afterwards, the teams have been engaged in the robot's hardware and software setup."Lectures and practical sessions have been held in days 2, 3 and 4, with morning theoretical lectures, followed by brief introductions of the related benchmarking techniques. In the afternoons practical activities have been arranged, where participant teams tried to implement some of the technical solutions presented in the morning lectures either in the @Home or in the @Work setting. The topics addressed in the camp were: " (1) Vision based (RGB-D) pattern recognition for object detection and localization, (2) object manipulation and grasping and (3) human-robot interaction in natural language."Additional lectures on specific benchmarking tools and approaches have been given by POLIMI every day, focusing on the topic of the corresponding lecture." In the final day, the teams prepared and then presented a demonstration of their accomplishments, showing good performances and great knowledge improvements."

The teams attending the camp have been selected among the applicants that have responded to an open call issued at the end of the summer and closed in mid November. In total we had 63 participants with 19 teams, 11 for the @Home track (Figure"1) and 8 for the @Work track (Figure"2). Some teams brought their own robots, while the other teams have been provided with robots from the RoCKIn partners and from other teams. In particular, BRSU made their @Home robot (Care-O-bot 3) as well as two of their youBots available for @Work including tutorials on how to use the hardware and already available software modules. The environmental elements for the @Work track arena was also provided by BRSU consisting of several service areas, wall elements, a conveyor belt as well as the manipulation objects (see Figure"3).

"

Figure'3:'@Work'environment'with'several'service'areas'and'a'conveyor'belt'

KUKA provided two more youBots for the @Work teams. Notably, PAL Robotics, which entered the Camp with a team, allowed developments on their service robot for the @Home section."

8""

The rest of the document first presents the organizational details, then the technical program and finally summarizes the main outcomes of the event, also based on the questionnaires answered by the participants."

( (

9""

5 ROCKIN(CAMP(2014(ORGANIZATION(

This section describes the camp organizational issues, from the participant selection process to the logistics. The RoCKIn Camp organization included the PI of each partner. Moreover, two committees have been appointed for the specific organization of each of the two tracks, @Home (chaired by Luca Iocchi, UNIROMA) and @Work (chaired by Jakob Berghofer, KUKA and Fredrik Hegger; BRSU). The local coordination of the event was jointly carried out by Daniele Nardi and Alberto Pretto, with the support of all the members of UNIROMA1: in particular: Emanuele Bastianelli, Roberto Capobianco, Stephen McGill and Jacopo Serafin, acted as technical support for the activities carried out at the practicals in days 2, 3 and 4.

5.1 PARTICIPANTS((

5.1.1 THE'SELECTION'PROCESS'

An application form has been opened in the RoCKIn Camp 2014 web site, where two application formats were accepted:"

• Team applications (for teams of 2-3 people, not necessarily from the same university, but with an already established joint team). Team applicants were encouraged to bring their robot to be used in the practical activities, but this was not a requirement."

• Individual applications by existing or prospective team members."

Each applicant had to include:"

• A scientific CV for each member"

• A team description, or a team formation plan reporting: scientific background, research objectives, expected knowledge / performance improvement, and description of the team (including previous experience, role and competence of team members) or the plan about the team formation."

25 team applications and 4 individual applications have been received for the RoCKIn Camp 2014 event. In most cases applications included good quality team descriptions and the curricula vitae of the candidates were adequate for the purposes of the Camp. Because of resource limitations, the RoCKIn Camp organization committee, accepted 18 over 25 teams and 2 over 4 individual applications Some members of the non-accepted teams have been accepted as individual members, on the basis of their submitted material.

"

"

10""

5.1.2 ACCEPTED'PARTICIPANTS'

The list of acceped participants for the camp includes 63 students and researchers from 13 countries, as reported in the tables of Appendix"A. Participants have been divided (some teams were formed by the individual applicants) into 19 teams, 11 for the @Home track (Appendix"A: table 1) and 8 for the @Work track (Appendix"A: table 2). The tables in Appendix"A include also information about the robots brought by the teams at the Camp.

"

5.2 VENUE,(ACCOMMODATION(AND(SOCIAL(EVENTS((

"

Figure'4:'A'lecture'at'DIAG'(prof.'Norman'Hendrich,'Univ.'of'Hamburg,'Germany)'

The lectures of the RoCKIn Camp 2014 took place in the Department of Computer, Control, and Management Engineering (DIAG) “Antonio Ruberti” at Sapienza University of Rome (Figure"4), while the practical sessions in the afternoon and the final demonstration have been located at “Auditorium Antonianum” (www.auditoriumantonianum.it, Figure"5, Figure"6). "

11""

"

Figure'5:'Entrance'of'the'"Auditorium'Antonianum"'

All participants and invited speakers have been accommodated at the expense of the organization in the “Domus Sessoriana” (www.domussessoriana.it). Housing, lunches, a social dinner and coffee-breaks were provided to all the participants. In addition, teams that brought to the camp their own robots received a travel support up to 1200 Euros, while teams without a robot received a travel support up to 600 Euros (to be refunded after the event against presentation of the receipts).

(

Figure'6:'"Auditorium'Antonianum":'@Work'room'

(

5.3 OTHER(FINANCIAL(SUPPORT("The RoCKIn Camp 2014 has received a financial support from the IEEE Robotics & Automation Society "

12""

in the context of the Technical Education Programs (RAS-TEP)2, formerly Summer Schools. This support of 20K USD has enabled the acceptance of a much larger number of participants and represents an increase of about 40% of the budget planned by RoCKIn. The initial estimation was to accept no more than 12 teams and up to 36 participants, while with the additional support 19 were actually accepted with a total of 63 participants. Moreover, we acknowledge the support of Department of Computer, Control, and Management Engineering (DIAG) “Antonio Ruberti” at Sapienza University of Rome for the lectures.

(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( (((((((((((((((((((((

2" " http://www.ieeeRras.org/educationalRresourcesRoutreach/summerRschools"

13""

6 ROCKIN(CAMP(2014(PROGRAM((

This section describes the activities carried out before and during the camp, from the preliminary activities to the final demonstration.

6.1 PRELIMINARY(WORK("The attendance to the camp required some preliminary work in order to build a sufficient basis to get the best profit from the event. In order to better manage the preparation activities, and to share important information, a Moodle3 page (Figure"7) has been prepared, where a set of topics with related assignments were included. The idea was to ensure that all participants have basic knowledge about standard robotics middleware as ROS, standard perceptions libraries like OpenCV and PCL, etc... The preparation topics, to be completed before the camp, were: "

!Figure'7:'The'RoCKIn'Camp'2014'Moodle'page'

"1. ROS Basics: Ubuntu/ROS basic installation and usage, introduction to ROS localization and

navigation packages."2. Object Recognition: OpenCV/PCL basic usage, example with a basic pattern recognition

package"3. Object Manipulation: MoveIT! basic usage"4. Human–Robot Interaction: Foundations on commanding a robots using natural language speech"5. @Home Demonstration: Quick guide about the usage of a standard robot for the @Home track,

information about the @Home final demonstration"6. @Work Demonstration: Quick guide about the usage of a standard robot for the @Work track,

information about the @Work final demonstration"7. Benchmarking: Information on how the enable the benchmarking tools exploited during the

(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( (((((((((((((((((((((

3" " https://moodle.org"

14""

camp.""The Moodle page has been used extensively also during the camp, publishing new materials, updates, information, manuals, and surveys. "

6.2 CAMP(PROGRAM(DESCRIPTION("As above mentioned, the camp has been structured with theoretical lectures, practical activities and a final demonstration in which each team presented a real application based on the learned topics. Below, the technical program is described in detail.

Program at a glance:

• Day 1: Presentation of the basic software tools used in the camp and robots’ hardware and software setup

• Day 2-3-4: theoretical lectures and practical activities, described below

• Day 5: final demonstration, described below

The complete camp schedule can be found in Appendix"B.

6.2.1 THEORETICAL'LECTURES'

Lectures were delivered in mornings of days 2, 3 and 4, each one followed by brief introductions of the related benchmarking techniques. Below are reported the lectures abstracts:

"

Vision based (RGBD) pattern recognition, object detection and localisation

Teacher: Michael Zillich, Technical Univ. Wien, Austria"

Abstract: In this lecture about vision based pattern recognition, object detection and localization with RGBD sensors, we will cover first the basics of 3D imaging, available sensors and standard representations. We will then go over the building blocks of an RGBD vision pipeline: segmentation (from the simplest case of table plane removal to segmentation in clutter); learning of 3D models at instance and category level; object detection and recognition from 2D and 3D features; object categorisation from 3D data; localisation and mapping from RGBD. Each part of the lecture will contain an short (not comprehensive) overview of state of the art, theory and practical application of a selected approach.

"

"

15""

Object grasping and manipulation

Teacher: Norman Hendrich, Univ. of Hamburg, Germany"

Abstract: General introduction about motion-planning for robot-arms and the basic physics of grasping with a two-finger gripper before the coffee-break."

The second half would then introduce MoveIt! and some heuristics for grasping objects with the different grippers available on the actual robots. Afternoon is the practical session.

"

Human–robot interaction in natural language, MIT CSAIL, Cambridge, MA, USA

Teacher: Matthew Walter"

Abstract: If robots are to work effectively alongside people in our homes and workplaces, they must be able to efficiently communicate with humans. Free form spoken language provides a means of communication that is expressive and intuitive for people to use. This lecture will describe the challenges that we face in developing robots that can understanding a human's natural language commands and will introduce you to solutions that overcome these challenges.""

We will begin with with an overview of spoken language understanding (SLU) with an emphasis on statistical formulations to the language understanding problem. From there, we will delve into SLU in the context of human-robot interaction, specifically a robot's ability to interpret a humans free form spoken instructions. The problem is to convert natural language commands into their corresponding constituents in the robot's model of its state and action space. We will formulate this problem as one of first transcribing spoken utterances into text, then identifying the text's grammatical structure, and lastly one of inferring the robot's actions and the object in its model of the environment most likely associated with this parse structure. I will focus in particular on the Generalized Grounding Graph (G^3) framework that builds a probabilistic graphical model according to the hierarchical structure of the uttered text. The G^3 model employs a semantic parse structure known as Spatial Description Clauses (SDCs) to build a factor graph that maps linguistic constituents from the command to their latent "groundings" in the robot's state and action space. The G^3 model learns the meaning of words in a semi-supervised fashion from a corpus of natural language commands paired with their corresponding groundings. The graphical model expresses the distribution over the correspondence between a given command and its corresponding groundings, and the SLU problem is then one of inferring the most likely groundings for a given free form utterance."

If time allows, I will follow by presenting applications of the G^3 algorithm that extend beyond using speech to command robots. In particular, I will describe its use in a semantic mapping framework that allows people to share human-centric models of their environment with robots by leading them on a narrated tour. Additionally, I will show how the probabilistic model produced by G^3 can be used to support dialog between humans and their robot partners.

"

16""

6.2.2 PRACTICAL'SESSIONS'

'Figure'8::'A'@Home'robot'performing'the'object'recognition'task'

The afternoons have been devoted to the practical activities, with the goal of implementing some technical solutions presented in the morning lectures. During each practical session, the teacher and some local PhD students assisted the participants in their activities, supporting them and providing, when needed, technical advice and solutions."

Object Recognition

Participants were provided with a set of common-use objects (different for the two tracks @Work and @Home): aim of this activity was to recognize and localize these objects using an RGB-D sensor (e.g., Figure"8). In the @Home track, mainly visual features-based approaches were exploited for both object recognition and localization."

In the @Work track, objects were recognized using a specific marker, while the localization was performed using 3D model-based registration.

"

Object Manipulation

Participants were introduced to the use of the MoveIT! Package, i.e. from the robot representation to the planning module. This tool has been exploited for object manipulation and grasping (e.g., Figure"9)"

17""

!Figure'9:'A'robot'performing'object'manipulation''and'grasping'actions'

Human–Robot Interaction

Participants were provided with a basic Natural Language Understanding module. It was composed of an interface for the speech recognition and of a statistical parser used to get the final meaning of a spoken command. Participants were asked to run the training process for the parser starting from data provided in advance with the module. The aim of this activity was to translate an spoken command of a human into the respective action executed by the robot (e.g., Figure"10).

Figure'10:'Human–Robot'Interaction'demonstration'

(

(

18""

6.2.3 FINAL'DEMONSTRATION'

'Figure'11:'An'@Home'team'while'preparing'for'the'final'demonstration'

At the final day, the teams had the opportunity to show their improvements with a live demonstration on their robots (e.g., Figure"11). Each team prepared a presentation to describe its final demonstration. Some example are reported in Appendix""C. Among others, the demonstrations presented at the final day of the camp included:

• HRI and navigation tasks, e.g. move the robot using voice commands, like "go to the kitchen". • Pick and place tasks, e.g. pick a specific object from the table of one room and place it in a

different room. • Visual serving and manipulation tasks, e.g. localize a special marker in the robot reference frame,

moving the robot arm to predetermined positions. Most of the teams were able to present a demonstration with real robots, while few less experienced teams presented their results in simulation.

6.3 AWARDS(

At the end of the camp, based on the quality of the best-in-class demonstrations, the RoCKIn organization committee selected the following awards, that were given in the closing ceremony: "

• Best in perception "

◦ Winner: Team IAS Lab shared the award with SPQR (Rome local team)"

• Best in manipulation"

◦ Winner: SocRob@Home"

• Best in HRI"

19""

◦ Winner: Team UvA@Work"

• Best @Home demonstration"

◦ Winner: Team Homer@UniKoblenz"

• Best @Work demonstration

◦ Winner: Team Aachen

20""

7 ROCKIN(CAMP(2014(EVALUATION("

After the event, participants were asked to fill in a questionnaire to provide some feedback on the outcome of the camp. The full set of answers collected (about half of the participants) is reported in the Appendix D. Below we provide some discussion and comments.

7.1 CAMP'S(ORGANIZATION(AND(FACILITIES((

The overall Camp's management, in terms of facilities, location and services, has been highly appreciated, despite there's been a problem with distribution of lunch at the first day, that has been solved starting from the second day. This is especially satisfactory given that the location was downtown Rome, walking distance from the Colosseum and that all the expenses were covered within the budget of the event.

7.2 TECHNICAL(PROGRAM((

The morning lectures have generally received very good ratings, possibly partly dependent on the level of previous knowledge on the subject by the attendees, which is not uniform across the three subjects and is quite varying from beginners to expert level.

Practical activities have been appreciated as well with ratings generally from good to very good. It is worth noting that in the case of the practicals the previous know-how and background of the students play a significant role. Some of the students were able to get a very quick start on the basics of ROS and other tools, while others managed not only to comlplete the activities planned by the teachers, but also to integrate some of them in the final demonstration. This gap is particularly significant for example in the practical “Vision based pattern recognition, object detection and localization”, where previous experience was essential and possibly hard to acquire in the time available for the preparation before the event.

The above considerations suggest that the organization of such events could possibly be more focussed, targeting either beginner level teams or experienced ones. On the other hand, given that one event was planned in the RoCKIn program, the goal of servicing a varied audience has been quite successfully achieved.

7.3 OVERALL(SATISFACTION((

The best indicator of the success of the event, in the view of the local organizers, are the reports on the “Ability(to(reuse(knowledge(and(tools”(in(the(individual(sections(of(the(questionnaire,(and,(even(more,(in(the(“Overall(Team(Progress”( section( compiled(by( the( team( leaders,(which( show(a( really( satisfactory(outcome,(

21""

that( combined(with( the( intentions( to( participate( to( the( RoCKIn( challenges,( shows( that( the( RoCKIn( Camp(2014(has(completely(fulfilled(the(expectations(and(goals(set(in(the(work(plan.(( (

22""

8 APPENDIX(A(8.1 TEAMS(AND(PARTICIPANTS(LIST((

Table 1: Teams for the @Home track" " "

Team MaiRAp" " "

Member name" Main institution (University)" Country"

Karla Andrea Trejo Ramírez" Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya" Spain"

Juan Manuel Acevedo Valle" Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya" Spain"

Edgar Riba Pi" Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya" Spain"

Albert Pumarola Peris" Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya" Spain"

" " "

Team PAL Robotics"" (Brought its own robot)" "


Jonathan Gonzalez" PAL Robotics" Spain"

Sammy Pfeiffer" PAL Robotics" Spain"

" " "

Team CIT" " "


Jaroslav Ondo" Technical University of Kosice" Slovakia"

Ladislav Mizenko" Technical University of Kosice" Slovakia"

" " "

Team Mix @home" " "


Conor McGinn" Trinity College Dublin" Ireland"

Vaibhav Kumar Mehta" Jacobs University Bremen" Germany"

Mikhail Zarechnev" Izmir Institute of Technology" Turkey"

23""

" " "

Team PANDORA Robotics " " "


Despoina Paschalidou" Aristotle University of Thessaloniki" Greece"

Konstantinos Avdelidis" Aristotle University of Thessaloniki" Greece"

Evangelos Apostolidis" Aristotle University of Thessaloniki" Greece"

" " "

Team SocRob@Home" (Brrought its own robot)" "


Rodrigo Ventura" Instituto Superior Técnico (Lisbon)" Portugal"

João Messias" Instituto Superior Técnico (Lisbon)" Portugal"

Filipe Jesus" Instituto Superior Técnico (Lisbon)" Portugal"

Diogo Pires" Instituto Superior Técnico (Lisbon)" Portugal"

" " "

Team Watermelon Project" (Brought its own robot)" "


Francisco Rodriguez Lera" Universidad de León" Spain"

Fernando Casado García" Universidad de León" Spain"

Carlos Rodriguez Hernández" Universidad de León" Spain"

Victor Rodriguez" Universidad de León" Spain"

" " "

Team homer@UniKoblenz" " "


Alruna Veith" Koblenz-Landau" Germany"

Ivanna Mykhalchyshyna" Koblenz-Landau" Germany"

Raphael Memmesheimer" Koblenz-Landau" Germany"

24""

" " "

Team BARC" " "


Lenka Mudrova" University of Birmingham" United kingdom"

Ashish Kumar" University of Birmingham" United kingdom"

Sean Bastable" University of Birmingham" United kingdom"

" " "

Team BORG" (Brought its own robot)" "


Shantia Amirhosein" University of Groningen" The Netherlands"

Jansen Sybren" University of Groningen" The Netherlands"

Mulder Anton" University of Groningen" The Netherlands"

" " "

Team Assistobot B.V" (Brought its own robot)" "


Tim van Elteren" Assistobot B.V." The Netherlands"

Egbert van der Wal" Assistobot B.V." The Netherlands"

Christof Oost" Assistobot B.V." The Netherlands"

Ron Snijders" Assistobot B.V." The Netherlands"

"

"

Table 2: Teams for the @work track" " "

Team IAS-Lab " " "


Elena Zanotto" University of Padua" Italy"

Nicolò Boscolo" University of Padua" Italy"

25""

Michele Marostica" University of Padua" Italy"

" " "

Team Robotic team Gymspit " " "


Lenka Caletkova" FEL CTU" Czech Republic"

Tomas Novak " FEL CTU" Czech Republic"

Ondrej Holesovsky" FEL CTU" Czech Republic"

" " "

Team UvA@Work" (Brought its own robot)" "


Sebastien Negrijn" Universiteit van Amsterdam" The Netherlands"

Janosch Haber" Universiteit van Amsterdam" The Netherlands"

Stephan van Schaik" Universiteit van Amsterdam" The Netherlands"

Arnoud Visser" Universiteit van Amsterdam" The Netherlands"

" " "

Team Binary-b-it-bots" (Brought its own robot)" "


Erenus Yildiz" Bonn-Rhein-Sieg University of Applied Sciences" Germany"

Oscar Lima Carrion" Bonn-Rhein-Sieg University of Applied Sciences" Germany"

Bipin Kumar" Bonn-Rhein-Sieg University of Applied Sciences" Germany"

Anahita Bagherzad Halimi"Tehran University/Amirkabir University of technology" Iran"

" " "

Team b-it-bots-Neo" (Brought its own robot)" "


Ashok Meenakshi Sundaram" Bonn-Rhein-Sieg University of Applied Sciences" Germany"

26""

Saugata Biswas" Bonn-Rhein-Sieg University of Applied Sciences" Germany"

Shehzad Ahmed" Bonn-Rhein-Sieg University of Applied Sciences" Germany"

Saeed Abdolshah" University of Padua" Iran"

" " "

Team METALHEADS" " "


Tirupachuri Venkata Sai Yeshasvi" Ecole Centrale de Nantes" France"

Atal anil kumar" Ecole Centrale de Nantes" France"

Prashanth Ramadoss" Ecole Centrale de Nantes" France"

Stefan Eric le Noach" Ecole Centrale de Nantes" France"

" " "

Team ISEP@Work" " "


Rui Alen" ISEP-Instituto Superior de Engenharia do Porto" Portugal"

Pedro Rodrigues " ISEP-Instituto Superior de Engenharia do Porto" Portugal"

Manuel Silva" ISEP-Instituto Superior de Engenharia do Porto" Portugal"

" " "

Team youBot-Team Aachen" (Brought its own robot)" "


Fabian Buse" RWTH Aachen University" Germany"

Alexander Leutner" RWTH Aachen University" Germany"

Jonathan Roberz" RWTH Aachen University" Germany"

"

27""

9 APPENDIX(B((

9.1 CAMP(SCHEDULE( January 26th, 2014

8:30 / 9:30" Registration" "Location: Auditorium Antonianum"

9:30 / 10:30" Welcome and RoCKIn Camp Introduction"

Speakers:-Pedro Lima -Daniele Nardi"

Location: Auditorium Antonianum Room:: San Francesco (both tracks)"

10:30 / 12:00"

RoCKIn @home and @work Introduction"

Speakers @home: -Tijn van der Zant -Sam Pfeifer, Jonathan Gonzalez -Luca Iocchi Speakers @work: -Gerhard K. Kraetzschmar -Jakob Berghofer -Alberto Pretto"

Location: Auditorium Antonianum Room:: San Francesco (both tracks)"

12:00/ 14:00" Lunch" "

Location: Auditorium Antonianum"

14:00/ 18:00"

Setup hardware and software" "

Location:Auditorium Antonianum Room:: -San Francesco (@home track) -San Bernardino (@work track)"

17:30/ 18:00" Team leaders meeting" "

Location: Auditorium Antonianum Room:: -San Francesco (@home track) -San Bernardino (@work track)"

"

28""

January 27th, 2014

8:30 / 10:00"Lecture: Vision based (RGB-D) pattern recognition, object detection and localization (1)"

Speaker: Michael Zillich"

Location: DIAG Room: Aula Magna (both tracks)"

10:00/ 10:30"

Coffee break" " Location: DIAG"

10:30 / 11:30"

Lecture: Vision based (RGB-D) pattern recognition, object detection and localization (2)"

Speaker: Michael Zillich"


11:30 / 12:00"

Lecture: Benchmarking in perception"Speaker: Matteo Matteucci"


12:00/ 14:00"

Lunch" "Location: Auditorium Antonianum"

14:00/ 18:00"

Afternoon Practical Session" "


17:30/ 18:00"

Team leaders meeting" "


"

January 28th, 2014 8:30 / 10:00"

Lecture: Object grasping and manipulation (1)"

Speaker: Norman Hendrich"

Location: DIAG, Room: Aula Magna (both tracks)"

10:00/ 10:30" Coffee break" " Location: DIAG"

10:30 / 11:30"

Lecture: Object grasping and manipulation (2)"

Speaker: Norman Hendrich"


11:30 / 12:00"

Lecture: Benchmarking in manipulation"

Speaker: Matteo Matteucci"


12:00/ 14:00" Lunch" " Location: Auditorium Antonianum"

14:00/ 18:00" Afternoon Practical Session" " Location: Auditorium Antonianum Room:: -San Francesco (@home

29""

track) -San Bernardino (@work track)"



"

January 29th, 2014

8:30 / 10:00"Lecture: Human–robot interaction in natural language (1)"

Speaker: Matthew Walter"


10:00/ 10:30" Coffee break" " Location: DIAG"

10:30 / 11:30"Lecture: Human–robot interaction in natural language (2)"

Speaker: Matthew Walter"


11:30 / 12:00" Lecture: Benchmarking in HRI"Speaker: Andrea Bonarini"


12:00/ 14:00" Lunch" "Location: Auditorium Antonianum"

14:00/ 18:00" Afternoon Practical Session" "




20:00/ 22:00" Social event" " "

"

January 30th, 2014 8:30 / 12:00" Final demonstration setup" Location: Auditorium Antonianum

Room: -San Francesco (@home track)

30""

-San Bernardino (@work track)"

12:00/ 14:00" Lunch" Location: Auditorium Antonianum"

14:00/ 18:00" Final demonstration"Location: Auditorium Antonianum Room:: -San Francesco (@home track) -San Bernardino (@work track)"

( (

31""

10 APPENDIX((C(10.1 FINAL(DEMONSTRATION(DESCRIPTIONS( Each team presented a description of its final demonstration, some example reported below. "

10.2 @HOME(TEAMS( Team: BARC""Demo: We prepared a simulation of our robot which accepts voice commands. The robot is capable of navigating in its environment and go to different rooms based on the command received. It recognises four different types of rooms: kitchen, hall, living room and studio.""The robot works as follow.: when the robot receives the voice command, it tries to convert it to text using Google's Speech Recogniser. If the converted text contains any of the words from our predefined set of words (living room, kitchen etc), the robot responds by navigating the robot to the specified room. If the converted text contains un-recognised words, the robot asks for correction.""Team: BORG""Demo: In the final demonstration we will be doing parts of the cocktail party task from the Robocup@Home competition. We're (probably) not going to draw the attention of a person, we'll just start asking for an order. The robot will interpret this order and navigate to the location of the object. It will recognize it and say where the object is located. As we still have no working arm (both real and in simulation), we'll not be able to do any grasping. But we will at least say where the object is located. The robot will then return to the person who did the order.""Team: CIT""Demo: Our plan is to move the robot in the area using voice commands – “go to the kitchen”, “go to the hall”, ... . Due to Kinect sensor issue on REEM robot we will not be able to present object recognition using robot. Maybe we will be able to show it using only the laptop.""Team: homer@UniKoblenz""Demo: Bring some guests something to drink""Team: MAiRAp""Demo: For our final presentation REEM robot will go to a certain room, receive instructions in order to deliver an object to a specific person localized in another room and search for that person asking for their name.""Team: COB3""Demo: For the final demonstration we plan to perform an integration of the tools provided in the Camp.

32""

Our plan is to instruct the robot to go in front of a predefined speaker position where it will ask for a desired object to be fetched from the table. After receiving the command, the robot will vocally recognize the desired object (among a box of cereal and a coke), go to the table, visually recognize the object, grasp it and finally return and hand it to the speaker.""Team: SocRob@Home""Demo: Our current plan is for the robot to pick a cereals box on the table of one room and place it on the table of a different room.""Team: Watermelon Project""Demo: In the final demo, we want to show a voice control system to navigate the robot. Moreover we will order the robot to recognize an object on the table and, if a pick up is possible, the robot will try to grasp the object and move it to another place.""

10.3 @WORK(TEAMS("

Team: UvA@Work"

Demo: For the HRI part, we will demonstrate a basic voice_teleop node based on the MIT framework. Our team controlled the robot until now directly with programs based on the youbot_driver. Our main goal for this week was to get familiar with the ROS framework, the youbot ros-driver and the available packages related to the Kuka youBot. Another goal was to get more experience with the hardware as we are all AI or CS students and not Robotics or Electrical Engineering. During this Camp we have achieved all of our goals,"

Team: b-it-bots"

Demo: "

- Basic Navigation and localization,"

- Data Matrix Pattern Recognition,"

- Data Matrix localization with frame transformation to arm link,"

- Moving robot arm to predetermined positions with Moveit."

"

Team: ISEP@Work"

Demo: we will demonstrate basic navigation using the available packages at the Rome 2014 Camp."

Team background: when we arrived we had basic knowledge of ROS and only had tested basis ROS functionalities running some tutorials."

33""

Team achievements - since we do not have an available Kuka youBot platform at our institution, our main objective for this hands-on Camp was to make the youBot move, by understanding the underlying relations between ROS and the youBot hardware, in order to determine and face the difficulties that could arise. Another objective was to know the other participating teams and establish work relations. Both of these objectives were achieved with full success."

Team: youBot-Team Aachen"

Demo: The youBot navigates in the generated map to the position where he is supposed to pick up something. He moves his arm up and navigates to the position where he has to put the thing down. There he moves his arm up again."

34""

11 APPENDIX(D((

11.1 QUESTIONNAIRES("Part of the tasks related to the Camp management involves assessing the quality of the activities related to the Camp. A satisfaction questionnaire has been designed, covering every aspect of the camp.""Below is reported a set of tables comprehensive of all the questionnaire’s questions and the feedback provided by the participants.""

For all participants

1 - About the Organization "(a)"Before"the"school:"web"site,"mails,"travel"arrangements,"…"

Rnot"so"good"(1):" 0"

Radequate"(2):" 0"

Rgood"(3):" 9(30.00%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 14(46.67%)"

Rexceptional"(5):" 7(23.33%)"

Average:(3.93"

(b)"During"the"school"(DIAG):"schedule,"coffee"breaks,"lecture"rooms,"..."


Radequate"(2):" 4(13.33%)"

Rgood"(3):" 5(16.67%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 16(53.33%)"


Average:(3.73"

35""

(c)"During"the"school"(Antonianum):"space,"schedule,"meals,"space,"help"in"case"of"problems,"..."

Rnot"so"good"(1):" 5(16.67%)"

Radequate"(2):" 2(6.67%)"

Rgood"(3):" 7(23.33%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 11(36.67%)"


Average:(3.30"

(d)"Localities:"quality"of"accommodation,"ease"of"access,"social"dinner,"…"

Rnot"so"good"(1):" 2(6.67%)"

Radequate"(2):" 0"

Rgood"(3):" 4(13.33%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 12(40.00%)"


Average:(4.07"

(d)"Overall"


Radequate"(2):" 2(6.67%)"

Rgood"(3):" 5(16.67%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 17(56.67%)"


Average:(3.90"

"

2 - Lectures and practicals: Vision based (RGB-D) pattern recognition, object detection and localization ""

36""

"(a)"Participant"level"

R1"R"beginner"(1):" 6(20.00%)"

R2"(2):" 4(13.33%)"

R3"(3):" 8(26.67%)"

R4"(4):" 10(33.33%)"

R5"R"expert"(5):" 2(6.67%)"

Average:(2.93"

(b)"Adequacy"of"contents"


Radequate"(2):" 3(10.00%)"

Rgood"(3):" 12(40.00%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 13(43.33%)"


Average:(3.47"

(c)"Preparation"Material"

Rnot"so"good"(1):" 2(6.67%)"

Radequate"(2):" 8(26.67%)"

Rgood"(3):" 11(36.67%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 8(26.67%)"


Average:(2.93"

(d)"General"usefulness"

Rnot"so"good"(1):" 1(3.33%)"

Radequate"(2):" 7(23.33%)"

37""

Rgood"(3):" 9(30.00%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 10(33.33%)"


Average:(3.23"

(e)"Quality"of"teacher"

Rnot"so"good"(1):" 1(3.33%)"

Radequate"(2):" 3(10.00%)"

Rgood"(3):" 8(26.67%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 14(46.67%)"


Average:(3.57"

(f)"Practicals"

Rnot"so"good"(1):" 5(16.67%)"

Radequate"(2):" 5(16.67%)"

Rgood"(3):" 13(43.33%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 7(23.33%)"

Rexceptional"(5):" 0"

Average:(2.73"

(g)"Ability"to"reuse"knowledge"and"tools"

Rnot"so"good"(1):" 2(6.67%)"

Radequate"(2):" 6(20.00%)"

Rgood"(3):" 15(50.00%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 6(20.00%)"


38""

Average:(2.93"

(h)"Overall"

Rnot"so"good"(1):" 1(3.33%)"

Radequate"(2):" 4(13.33%)"

Rgood"(3):" 15(50.00%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 8(26.67%)"


Average:(3.20"

"

3 - Lectures and practicals: Grasping and manipulation "

(a)"Participant"level"

R1"R"beginner"(1):" 5(16.67%)"

R2"(2):" 9(30.00%)"

R3"(3):" 4(13.33%)"

R4"(4):" 8(26.67%)"

R5"R"expert"(5):" 4(13.33%)"

Average:(2.90"


Rnot"so"good"(1):" 1(3.33%)"

Radequate"(2):" 4(13.33%)"

Rgood"(3):" 13(43.33%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 8(26.67%)"


39""

Average:(3.33"



Radequate"(2):" 9(30.00%)"

Rgood"(3):" 10(33.33%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 8(26.67%)"


Average:(3.17"



Radequate"(2):" 5(16.67%)"

Rgood"(3):" 9(30.00%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 12(40.00%)"


Average:(3.50"



Radequate"(2):" 3(10.00%)"

Rgood"(3):" 12(40.00%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 9(30.00%)"


Average:(3.60"

(f)"Practicals"

Rnot"so"good"(1):" 1(3.33%)"

40""

Radequate"(2):" 5(16.67%)"

Rgood"(3):" 12(40.00%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 8(26.67%)"


Average:(3.30"


Rnot"so"good"(1):" 1(3.33%)"

Radequate"(2):" 5(16.67%)"

Rgood"(3):" 10(33.33%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 7(23.33%)"


Average:(3.47"

(h)"Overall"


Radequate"(2):" 4(13.33%)"

Rgood"(3):" 11(36.67%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 12(40.00%)"


Average:(3.47"

"

4 - Lectures and practicals: Human–robot interaction""

(a)"Participant"level"

R1"R"beginner"(1):" 9(30.00%)"

R2"(2):" 8(26.67%)"

41""

R3"(3):" 4(13.33%)"

R4"(4):" 7(23.33%)"

R5"R"expert"(5):" 2(6.67%)"

Average:(2.50"



Radequate"(2):" 4(13.33%)"

Rgood"(3):" 6(20.00%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 12(40.00%)"


Average:(3.80"


Rnot"so"good"(1):" 1(3.33%)"

Radequate"(2):" 5(16.67%)"

Rgood"(3):" 7(23.33%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 12(40.00%)"


Average:(3.50"


Rnot"so"good"(1):" 1(3.33%)"

Radequate"(2):" 3(10.00%)"

Rgood"(3):" 9(30.00%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 11(36.67%)"


42""

Average:(3.60"



Radequate"(2):" 2(6.67%)"

Rgood"(3):" 2(6.67%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 12(40.00%)"


Average:(4.27"

(f)"Practicals"

Rnot"so"good"(1):" 1(3.33%)"

Radequate"(2):" 1(3.33%)"

Rgood"(3):" 12(40.00%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 12(40.00%)"


Average:(3.57"


Rnot"so"good"(1):" 1(3.33%)"

Radequate"(2):" 3(10.00%)"

Rgood"(3):" 9(30.00%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 12(40.00%)"


Average:(3.57"

(h)"Overall"


43""

Radequate"(2):" 2(6.67%)"

Rgood"(3):" 8(26.67%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 12(40.00%)"


Average:(3.87"

"

Only for Team Leaders "

(a)"Select"your"track"

R@Home:" 5(41.67%)"

R@Work:" 7(58.33%)"

(b)"Overall"organization"


Radequate"(2):" 0"

Rgood"(3):" 2(18.18%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 7(63.64%)"


Average:(4.00"

(c)"Overall"lectures"


Radequate"(2):" 0"

Rgood"(3):" 3(27.27%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 8(72.73%)"


44""

Average:(3.73"

(d)"Overall"practicals"

Rnot"so"good"(1):" 1(9.09%)"

Radequate"(2):" 0"

Rgood"(3):" 5(45.45%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 5(45.45%)"


Average:(3.27"

(e)"Overall"team"progress"


Radequate"(2):" 0"

Rgood"(3):" 4(36.36%)"

Rvery"good"(4):" 6(54.55%)"


Average:(3.73"

(f)"Plans"to"participate"in"the"next"RoCKIn"competition"

R1"R"Definitely"not"(1):" 1(9.09%)"

R2"(2):" 0"

R3"(3):" 1(9.09%)"

R4"(4):" 4(36.36%)"

R5"R"Definitely"yes"(5):" 5(45.45%)"

Average:'4.09(

rockin camp 2014 report finalrockinrobotchallenge.eu/rockin_d5.2.pdf · rockin camp 2014 has been...

Documents