Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Suave_infocom_2014
Suave_infocom_2014
Suave_infocom_2014
Jun Liu∗ , Zhaohui Wang†, Zheng Peng‡, Jun-Hong Cui‡ and Lance Fiondella§
∗ Instituteof Computing Technology, Ningbo Institute of Information Technology Application,
Chinese Academy of Science,China
† Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI 49931, USA
‡ Underwater Sensor Network Lab, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269, USA
§ Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE), University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth, MA 02747, USA
Email: liuj@nbicc.com, zhaohuiw@mtu.edu, {zhengpeng, jcui}@engr.uconn.edu, lfiondella@umassd.edu
Abstract—Swarms of autonomous underwater vehicles movement, indicating that such technology cannot provide
(AUVs) forming mobile underwater networks often oper- knowledge of absolute position. Thus, if the original posi-
ate in moving currents, which introduce severe turbulence tion is unknown or inaccurate, IMUs will be of limited use
that interferes with coordinated and stealthy navigation of
fleet. Therefore, individual AUV must adjust their heading for accurate navigation. Moreover, the IMU technology
whenever needed to ensure it can reach a pre-determined suffers from error accumulation. This accumulation occurs
destination. To achieve accurate navigation, AUVs must as a vehicle’s guidance system continuously updates its
maintain precise knowledge of their locations. This paper de- location according to the most recent IMU reading. Errors
velops the “Suave” (Swarm underwater autonomous vehicle in successive IMU measurements produce drifts that can
localization) algorithm to localize swarms of AUVs operating
in rough waters. The purpose of Suave is to ensure that all lead to ever-increasing disagreement between the actual
AUVs arrive at their destinations by preserving localization and estimated location, degrading localization efforts. The
throughout the entire mission. Suave lowers the probability Doppler Velocity Log (DVL) method [12] to estimate a ve-
that an AUV swarm is detected by reducing the number hicle’s velocity vector also suffers from similar limitations,
of occasions that vehicles must surface to obtain accurate inhibiting accurate localization. It turns out that acoustic
location information from external sources such as satellites.
The Suave algorithm also achieves better energy conservation communication [13] is suitable for absolute position esti-
through improved control of localization reference messages. mation in underwater networks because it enables accurate
Simulations show Suave significantly improves localization ranging, and does not suffer from error accumulation
accuracy, lowers energy consumption, and the probability of inherent in path based approaches when combined with
swarm detection. surfacing and re-localization.
This paper considers the localization problem for an
I. I NTRODUCTION AUV swarm traveling in an underwater environment to
facilitate the execution of a set of coordinated navigational
In recent years, advances in autonomous underwater maneuvers. The entire procedure consists of swarm de-
vehicle (AUVs) have facilitated a wide variety of ex- ployment, navigation, and occasional surfacing to enable
citing scientific applications, including automated ship localization. We propose the Suave algorithm to improve
hull inspection [1], [2], autonomous underwater cave ex- the accuracy of AUV localization, which consists of two
ploration [3], archaeological site mapping [4], [5], and key phases. The first phase selects the most suitable
surveys of underwater environments [6]–[8]. AUVs are reference AUVs for surfacing to re-localize from satellite
very promising because they eliminate the need to control information so that they can assist the remaining AUVs
vehicles remotely. However, many research challenges to localize after resubmerging. In the second phase, the
remain unsolved, including research related to underwater transmission time of the reference AUVs are coordinated
sensor networks [9]–[11]. Localization is one of the main to ensure that the remaining AUVs receive and decode
unaddressed problems. The critical importance of local- reference messages at virtually the same time so the impact
ization arises from its role in fundamental operations like of mobility during transmission and propagation time can
motion planning and map building, which are prerequisite be reduced. Suave also employs the interactive multiple
capabilities for virtually all underwater surveying missions model (IMM), an advanced tracking scheme, to improve
because data collected will only be useful when the the accuracy of AUV localization while submerged.
localization information is accurate. Localization is also The remainder of this paper is organized as follows.
essential for an AUV to maintain accurate knowledge of Section II presents design challenges. Section III describes
its position, orientation, and velocity, which are needed to the steps of the Suave algorithm. The key components of
safeguard the vehicle from collisions with other underwa- reference AUV selection and transmission time adjustment
ter objects and the seafloor. are discussed in Section IV, and Section V shows the error
The unavailability of global positioning system (GPS) analysis. Simulation results are provided in Section VI.
technology in the underwater environment further compli- Related work is reviewed in Section VII, followed by
cates the task of localizing AUVs. Many applications rely conclusions and future work in Section VIII.
on an Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) for navigation.
However, high performance IMUs are prohibitively expen- II. D ESIGN CHALLENGES
sive and can only provide an estimate of a vehicle’s inertial
Due to the unique characteristics of the underwater
978-1-4799-3360-0/14/$31.00 2014
c IEEE. acoustic channels and environment, underwater vehicle
65
IEEE INFOCOM 2014 - IEEE Conference on Computer Communications
Mixing
cast its accurate location to the un-surfacing AUVs
Extended
for localization. Once the un-surfacing AUVs are E2k-1 Kalman filter
E2k
out of the communication range of the three refer-
ence AUVs, or the localization variances of the un-
surfacing AUVs surpass a pre-determined threshold, Position estimate and
covariance combination
three new reference AUVs will be selected from the
un-surfacing AUVs for the next round of surfacing
operation, then serve as a new set of reference AUVs Nk
for other AUVs. In this method, during the local-
ization period of the un-surfacing AUVs, all three Mk: measured position at time k
Exk: estimated position and variance for mode x at time k
reference AUVs remain stationary in order to provide Nk: estimated position at time k
accurate location information, and all the other AUVs
move towards their individual destinations. Fig. 2. Block diagram of tracking routine
• Option 2 : The second method is assisted by an
oracle, where an accurate water current velocity is
known to each individual reference AUV, so that the estimator [16] is employed to encompass multiple patterns
reference AUV can accurately calculate its location of maneuvering.
during the period of submergence. The IMM is an adaptive estimation approach that differs
However, neither of these two approaches is suitable for from many other methods that assume a particular pattern
Suave, because the first slows navigation, and the second of movement. The IMM filter accommodates possible
is hard to achieve. Thus, we apply a hybrid method where movement patterns of the AUV by executing a set of filters
the reference AUVs localize themselves by estimating the in parallel, where each filter corresponds to a single pat-
velocity of the water current. tern. The overall state is then estimated as a combination
A reference AUV maintains its position where it is re- of these individual patterns. This paper assumes two AUV
localized in the previous round√ of localization, represented movement patterns:
→
−
as Pl = xl + jyl , where j = −1, either as a reference • uniform motion: moving along a straight line with a
AUV or otherwise. After surfacing, its new position is constant velocity, modeled by a Kalman filter (KF).
−→ • maneuver: coordinated turn with a constant turn
denoted Pc = xc + jyc . The velocity of the AUV is the
combination of the water current and propulsion system rate and a constant speed, modeled by an extended
→
− −
→ Kalman filter (EKF).
velocities between position Pl to Pc . Here, we assume
that AUVs operate in an open area and that water current Fig. 2 shows how these two filters operate in parallel,
velocity does not change significantly between consecutive and the combination of their estimates produces a final
surfacing periods. Since the propulsion system velocity estimate of the AUV position. The IMM estimate of AUV
−−→ location is computed as a weighted sum of the estimates
ϑ(t) = ϑx (t) + jϑy (t) is known to the AUV, the average
velocity of the water current − → from these multiple mode-matching filters. To identify
μ = μx + jμy can be
changes from one pattern of motion to the other, a Markov
estimated with:
tc chain transition matrix characterizing the changes from
−−→ −
→ − →
ϑ(t)dt + −
→ one motion pattern to another is introduced to update the
μ (tc − tl ) = Pc − Pl (1)
tl
weighting coefficients. The initial condition of each filter
is a combination of the model-conditioned estimates of the
After calculating the velocity of the water current, the two filters in the preceding state.
new position Pk at time k will be:
tk IV. T WO K EY COMPONENTS IN AUV L OCALIZATION
→ −
− → −−→
Pk = Pc + ϑ(t)dt + −
→μ (tk − tc ) (2) This section introduces the two major components of
tc Suave that improve localization accuracy, reference AUV
Remark 1: Note that, the water current velocity is esti- selection and transmission time adjustment.
mated by assuming it is constant, which may not be true. Note that, as a prerequisite, both of the following two
The inaccuracy will affect the tracking variance in the procedures require the AUVs’ location. In Suave, the
IMM, which will in turn affect the surfacing frequency. estimated position from the IMM for non-reference AUVs
2) Localization with AUV Tracking: An AUV moves and predicted position by computing water current velocity
toward the desired destination with its propulsion system. for reference AUVs are applied as the ground truth.
However, the vehicles heading is also passively influenced
by currents, which change throughout the mission to pro- A. Selection of Surfacing AUVs
duce complicated patterns of movement. The complexity The goal of selecting reference AUVs is to minimize
of the movements generated by currents are not easily the total localization uncertainty for all AUVs. Suave
characterized by a single pattern. Therefore, an IMM addresses two issues affecting the accuracy of localization.
66
IEEE INFOCOM 2014 - IEEE Conference on Computer Communications
Reference AUV AUV to be localized which can also be stacked into a vector-matrix form:
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
ϕ2 h(η, ξ 2 ) ω2
Uncertainty Region ⎢ ϕ3 ⎥ ⎢ h(η, ξ 3 ) ⎥ ⎢ ω3 ⎥
⎢ . ⎥=⎢ .. ⎥+⎢ . ⎥. (4)
Uncertainty Region ⎣ .. ⎦ ⎣ . ⎦ ⎣ .. ⎦
ϕN h(η, ξ N ) ωN
:=ϕ :=h(η ,ξ ) :=ω
67
IEEE INFOCOM 2014 - IEEE Conference on Computer Communications
λmi − δ
θi ≤ 1 − , m = 1, 2, 3 (17)
M
where M is a large positive integer. The constraint in
G1 (t3 t1 ) > G 2 (t '3 t '1 )
Eq.(17) may be explained as follows. If a message is not
G received within time period δ, λ is greater than δ, which
Improve the accuracy by limit
implies that λ−δ
M will be a small positive value because
M is a large positive integer. Thus, 1 − λ−δ M is positive,
Fig. 4. Adjust the transmission time requiring the binary variable θ to be 0. Similarly, if all
messages are received in the time period δ, λ−δ M will be
negative and 1 − λ−δM positive so that the binary variable
significantly. Ideally, a target AUV receives all three ref- θ can be either 0 or 1. However, θ tends to be 1 because
erence messages simultaneously. However, this is difficult of maximization. This enables the optimization problem
to achieve in practice because reference AUVs prefer to to be solved in linear time with a standard algorithm such
send only one message in each localization procedure as branch and cut. This optimization problem identifies
to conserve energy. Furthermore, perfect knowledge of the transmission time of each reference message that
vehicle positions cannot be guaranteed. Fig. 4 provides an reduces the impact of movement during transmission and
example to illustrate how limiting the discrepancy between propagation, improving the accuracy of localization.
the arrival of the first and last message can mitigate this
problem. The Suave algorithm determines the transmission V. E RROR A NALYSIS
time of the three reference AUVs to maximize the number The error in AUV localization includes two components,
of vehicles that receive these reference messages within a • location inaccuracy of reference AUVs caused by the
specified time period δ. Here, δ is a time interval for each estimation error of water current velocity;
AUV which is to be localized, and different AUVs may • location inaccuracy of the non-surfacing AUVs,
possess their own time line. which can be attributed to the location error of
The Suave algorithm tracks each AUV at all times so a reference AUVs and the location variance involved
rough estimate of their position is always available. Thus, in the localization process.
the distance from the three reference AUVs to all vehicles The following analysis examines these two sources of
may be denoted according to the following matrix: error.
τ11 τ12 . . . τ1N A. Error Analysis of Reference AUVs
τ= τ21 τ22 . . . τ2N (11)
In particular, the water current velocity of AUV i in the
τ31 τ32 . . . τ3N
X- and Y -coordinates is modeled as,
Let the transmission time of the three reference AUVs
μx,l,i = μ̂x,l,i + nx
be T = [t1 , t2 , t3 ], then the arrival times of these three (18)
messages to each AUV are: μy,l,i = μ̂y,l,i + ny
where μ̂x,l,i and μ̂y,l,i are the estimates of average current
t1 + τ11 t1 + τ12 . . . t1 + τ1N
velocity in the X- and Y -coordinates, and nx and ny are
Γ= t2 + τ21 t2 + τ22 . . . t2 + τ2N (12) the respective noise components introduced by variations
t3 + τ31 t3 + τ32 . . . t3 + τ3N
in current velocity.
We define: Denoting the time duration between consecutive broad-
casts from reference AUV as ΔT , let (x̂l,i [k], ŷl,i [k])
1 AUV i receives all reference messages in δ represent the estimated X- and Y -coordinates of AUV i
θi =
0 otherwise when broadcasting the kth message after the lth surfacing.
(13) We thus have
Hence, the objective of this optimization problem is to
maximize θ: x̂l,i [k] = xl,i [0] + μ̂x,l,i kΔT
N (19)
ŷl,i [k] = yl,i [0] + μ̂y,l,i kΔT
max θi . (14)
T where (xl,i [0], yl,i [0]) represents the location of AUV i
i=1
updated via GPS during the lth surfacing.
λ represents the difference in the times messages are Assuming nx ∼ N (0, σv2x ) and nx ∼ N (0, σv2y ), the
received: location variance of the reference AUV is
2
λ1i = |t1 + τ1i − t2 − τ2i | 2
σx,l,i [k] = σv2x (kΔT )
λ2i = |t1 + τ1i − t3 − τ3i | (15) 2 2 (20)
σy,l,i [k] = σv2y (kΔT )
λ3i = |t2 + τ2i − t3 − τ3i |
68
IEEE INFOCOM 2014 - IEEE Conference on Computer Communications
69
IEEE INFOCOM 2014 - IEEE Conference on Computer Communications
0.2
40,00 40,00 Random selection without transmission adjust
without water current with water current Suave
0.18 Without transmission adjust
30,00 30,00
0.14
Position at y−axis (m)
25,00 25,00
0.12
0.08
15,00 15,00
0.06
10,00 10,00
0.04
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8
5,00 5,00 Number of reference AUV
70
IEEE INFOCOM 2014 - IEEE Conference on Computer Communications
55
−2
10
50
Number of surfacing
Surface frequency (times/second)
45
−3
10
40
35
−0.9
10
−2
−4 10
10
0.05
0.1 −0.8
40 10
0.15
35
0.2 Localization NMSE
−1
10
30 Sending rate
0.25
25
0.3 20
Localization NMSE
0.35
0.4 10
15 Threshold of tracking variance Tr
Fig. 10. Effect from number of tracking messages
0.3
sional position and orientation tracking for the vehicle.
While this scheme demonstrates good performance in the
experimental setup, it may be difficult to implement in
0.2
realistic environments because there is no simple way
to reproduce a coded pattern on the seabed and the
0.1 effectiveness of cameras has not been thoroughly tested
in large underwater environments.
Maurelli [22] developed a sonar-based localization ap-
0
0 1 2 3 4
Threshold Tq
5 6 7 8 9
proach for an AUV in an unknown environment. His
approach developed an improved particle filter to represent
Fig. 9. Effect of threshold on qualified references the vehicle state, which relies on mechanically scanned
profiling sonar to acquire range profiles. Experimental
results demonstrated the robustness of the approach to
better localization accuracy because longer missions will noisy measurements. However, this system requires ad-
cause error accumulation. ditional equipment to enable the Doppler Velocity Log,
6) Effect from number of tracking messages: Fig. 10 significantly increasing the cost of an AUV .
examines the impact of the frequency of reference mes- Many acoustic communication-based localization algo-
sages on tracking. The results indicate that increasing rithms require extra deployments as references, including
the number of messages sent within a one second period a Phero-Trail Location service protocol [23] that projects
improves localization accuracy. This agrees with intuition the path of the mobile sink node onto a two-dimensional
that a larger number of reference messages provides the plane representing the water’s surface. Mobile underwater
tracking algorithm with more sample data, offering greater nodes are localized by querying sensor nodes on the
insight into the AUVs motion and improving the accu- water’s surface that track the projected path of the mobile
racy of location estimates. The frequency of reference underwater node. Ref. [24] localizes vehicles by measuring
messages also influences the number of AUV surfacing. the time-of-flight to surface buoys. Ref. [25] relies on a set
Low tracking variance suggests better tracking, which can of underwater acoustic transponders. Ref. [26] requires the
limit surfacing operations. However, a larger number of support of a surface ship and only allows the AUV to travel
reference messages can significantly increase the energy a short distance from the ship. Clearly, these strategies
consumed by communications. On the other hand, better impose restrictive assumptions regarding the supporting
localization reduces the energy that must be consumed infrastructure that will be available in the environment
during surfacing. Due to the lack of information on the where the mission is executed, which may not be easily
cost of surfacing, enhanced models to optimally balance satisfied in many situations.
this tradeoff are planned for future research. The particle filter model estimation technique, com-
monly used to estimate Bayesian models, has been widely
VII. R ELATED W ORK applied to AUV technology. Karlsson [27] proposed a
Despite the significant growth of UWSN research in particle filter approach for AUV navigation. However, the
recent years, techniques for AUV localization remain rela- focus of this study was mapping instead of localization.
71
IEEE INFOCOM 2014 - IEEE Conference on Computer Communications
Silver [28] presented a new technique for scan matching [8] O. Pizarro, R. Eustice, and H. Singh, “Large area 3d reconstruc-
with sparse, noisy sensors to enable an AUV to estimate tions from underwater surveys,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/MTS
OCEANS Conference and Exhibition, no. 2, Kobe, Japan, Nov 2004,
its position in a two-dimensional plane. Their approach pp. 678–687.
utilized a particle filter and an approximation of the [9] H. Mo, Z. Peng, Z. Zhou, M. Zuba, Z. Jiang, and J.-H. Cui, “Coding
likelihood of sensor readings based on nearest neighbor based multi-hop coordinated reliable data transfer for underwater
acoustic networks: Design, implementation and tests,” in IEEE
distances to approximate the probability distribution over GLOBECOM, Atlanta GA, USA, 2013.
possible poses. Ref. [29] suggested a probabilistic ap- [10] Y. Zhu, S. Le, L. Pu, X. Lu, Z. Peng, J.-H. Cui, and M. Zuba,
proach for visual cable tracking based on particle filters to “Aqua-net mate: A real-time virtual channel/modem simulator for
aqua-net,” in MTS/IEEE OCEANS, Bergen, Norway, 2013.
identify the appearance and movement of cables in image [11] X. Xu, S. Zhou, A. K. Morozov, and J. C. Preisig, “Per-survivor
sequences according to a measurement function. processing for underwater acoustic communications with direct-
Ramiro proposed a method to determine the shape of the sequence spread spectrum,” in J. Acoustical Society of America,
vol. 133, Atlanta GA, USA, May 2013, pp. 2746–2754.
swarm [30]. It deals with the localization problem of an [12] J. Snyder, “Doppler Velocity Log (DVL) navigation for observation-
underwater robotic swarm in the context of the HARNESS class rovs,” in OCEANS 2010, vol. 433, RI, USA, Sept 2010, pp.
project (Human telecontrolled Adaptive Robotic Network 1–9.
[13] S. Shatara, X. Tan, E. Mbemmo, N. Gingery, and S. Henneberger,
of Sensors). “Experimental investigation on underwater acoustic ranging for
small robotic fish,” in IEEE International Conference on Robotics
VIII. C ONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK and Automation, ICRA 2008, May 2008, pp. 712–717.
[14] D. B. Kilfoyle and A. B. Baggeroer, “The state of the art in under-
This paper presents Suave, a novel algorithm to localize water acoustic telemetry,” in IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering,
AUV swarms. Suave consists of two primary steps. The vol. 25, no. 1, January 2000, pp. 4–27.
[15] I. Couzin, J. Krause, N. Franks, and S. Levin, “Effective leadership
first selects an appropriate set of AUVs for surfacing and decision-making in animal groups on the move,” NATURE, vol.
to update their locations via external sources, such as 433, pp. 513–516.
satellites. The second localizes the non surfacing AUVs by [16] Y. Bar-Shalom, X. R. Li, and T. Kirubarajan, Estimation with
Applications to Tracking and Navigation. Wiley-Interscience,
allowing the surfacing AUVs to serve as reference nodes. 2001.
In this second step, an IMM filter is employed to improve [17] J. Liu, Z. Wang, M. Zuba, Z. Peng, J.-H. Cui, and S. Zhou, “Jsl:
the localization accuracy, and an investigation that adjusted Joint time synchronization and localization design with stratification
compensation in mobile underwater sensor networks,” in Annual
the transmission times of reference AUVs to address the IEEE Communications Society Conference on Sensor, Mesh and
negative effect from long propagation delay of acoustic Ad Hoc Communications and Networks (SECON), Seoul, Korea,
waves was presented. Suave proposes an algorithm to June 2012.
[18] P. Xie, Z. Zhou, Z. Peng, H. Yan, T. Hu, J.-H. Cui, Z. Shi, Y. Fei,
select references in an underwater vehicle network to and S. Zhou, “Aqua-sim: An ns-2 based simulator for underwater
improve the localization accuracy. It also conserves energy sensor networks,” MTS/IEEE Biloxi - Marine Technology for Our
by limiting the tracking reference messages and reducing Future: Global and Local Challenges, 2009.
[19] A. C. Bagtzoglou and N. A, “Chaotic behavior and pollution
the number of times AUV surface. dispersion characteristics in engineered tidal embayments: A nu-
In the future, we will further examine energy consump- merical investigation,” Journal of the American Water Resources
Association, pp. 207–219, 2007.
tion, including surfacing, communication, and navigation [20] K. N and Z. U. R, “Relative localisation for auv swarms,” IEEE
operations. Furthermore, we will extend Suave to multihop Symposium on Underwater Technology and Workshop on Scientific
networks, so that AUVs can scatter and regroup during a Use of Submarine Cables and Related Technologies, 2007.
[21] M. Carreras, P. Ridao, R. Garcia, , and T. Nicosevici, “Vision-based
mission. localization of an underwater robot in a structured environment,” in
IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, ICRA
R EFERENCES 03, December 2003.
[22] F. aurellic, S. Krupinskiy, Y. PetillotC, and J. Salviz, “A particle
[1] H. C. Brown, A. Kim, and R. M. Eustice, “An overview of filter approach for auv localization,” in OCEANS 2008, Sept 2008.
autonomous underwater vehicle research and testbed at perl,” in [23] L. F. M. Vieira, U. Lee, and M. Gerla, “Phero-trail: a bio-inspired
Marine Technology Society Journal, no. 2, 2009, pp. 33–47. location service for mobile underwater sensor networks,” in IEEE
[2] J. Vaganay, M. Elkins, S. Willcox, F. Hover, R. Damus, S. Desset, Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, no. 4, 2010, pp.
J. Morash, and V. Polidoro, “Ship hull inspection by hull-relative 553–563.
navigation and control,” in Proceedings of the MTS/IEEE OCEANS, [24] A. Caiti, A. Garulli, F. Livide, and D. Prattichizzo, “Localization
2005, pp. 761–766. of autonomous underwater vehicles by floating acoustic buoys: a
[3] N. Fairfield, G. A. Kantor, D. Jonak, and D. Wettergreen, “Depthx setmembership approach,” IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering,
autonomy software: design and field results,” in Tech. Rep. CMU- vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 140–152, Jan. 2005.
RI-TR-08-09, Robotics Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pitts- [25] L. Collin, S. Azou, K. Yao, and G. Burel, “On spatial uncertainty
burgh, PA, July 2008. in a surface long base-line positioning system,” in Proceedings of
[4] R. M. Eustice, H. Singh, J. J. Leonard, and M. R. Walter, “Visually the 5th Europ. Conf. Underwater Acoustics, Lyon, France, 2000.
mapping the rms titanic: conservative covariance estimates for slam [26] N.Storkensen, J. Kristensen, A. Indreeide, J. Seim, and T. Glancy,
information filters,” in International Journal of Robotics Research, “Huginuuv for seabed survey,” in Sea Technol, 1998.
no. 12, July 2006, pp. 1223–1242. [27] R. Karlsson, F. Gusfafsson, and T. Karlsson, “Particle filtering and
[5] H. Singh, J. Howland, and O. Pizarro, “Advances in large-area cramer-rao lower bound for underwater navigation,” April 2003,
photomosaicking underwater,” in IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engi- pp. VI–65–8.
neering, no. 3, July 2004, pp. 872–886. [28] D. Silver, D. M. Bradley, and S. Thayer, “Scan matching for flooded
[6] R. Armstrong, H. Singh, J. Torres, R. Nemeth, A. Can, C. Roman, subterranean voids,” in RAM’04, 2004, pp. 422–427.
R. Eustice, L. Riggs, and G. Garcia-Moliner, “Characterizing the [29] S. Wirth, A. Ortiz, D. Paulus, and G. Oliver, “Using particle filters
deep insular shelf coral reef habitat of the hind bank marine con- for autonomous underwater cable tracking,” in Proceedings of the
servation district (us virgin islands) using the seabed autonomous NGCUV08, Killaloe,Ireland, 2008.
underwater vehicle,” in Continental Shelf Research, no. 2, Feb [30] R. dell’Erba and C. Moriconi, “The localization problem for
2006, pp. 194–205. harness: A multipurpose robotic swarm,” SENSORCOMM 2012 ,
[7] D. Yoerger, A. Bradley, H. Singh, B. Walden, M. Cormier, and The Sixth International Conference on Sensor Technologies and
W. Ryan, “Multisensor mapping of the deep seafloor with the Applications.
autonomous benthic explorer,” in Proceedings of the International
Symposium on Unmanned Untethered Submersible Technology,
no. 2, Tokyo, Japan, May 2000, pp. 248–253.
72