skip to main content
10.1145/3302333.3302350acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesvamosConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Variability Modeling of Service Robots: Experiences and Challenges

Published:06 February 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

Sensing, planning, controlling, and reasoning, are human-like capabilities that can be artificially replicated in an autonomous robot. Such a robot implements data structures and algorithms devised on a large spectrum of theories, from probability theory, mechanics, and control theory to ethology, economy, and cognitive sciences. Software plays a key role in the development of robotic systems, as it is the medium to embody intelligence in the machine. During the last years, however, software development is increasingly becoming the bottleneck of robotic systems engineering due to three factors: (a) the software development is mostly based on community efforts and it is not coordinated by key stakeholders; (b) robotic technologies are characterized by a high variability that makes reuse of software a challenging practice; and (c) robotics developers are usually not specifically trained in software engineering. In this paper, we illustrate our experiences from EU, academic, and industrial projects in identifying, modeling, and managing variability in the domain of service robots. We hope to raise awareness for the specific variability challenges in robotics software engineering and to inspire other researchers to advance this field.

References

  1. S. Abd Halim, N. A. J. Dayang, I. Noraini, and D. Safaai. 2012. An Approach for Representing Domain Requirements and Domain Architecture in Software Product Line. In Software Product Line - Advanced Topic.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. R. Bashroush, I. Spence, P. Kilpatrick, J. Brown, and C. Gillan. 2008. A multiple views model for variability management in software product lines. (2008).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. T. Berger, R. Rublack, D. Nair, J. Atlee, M. Becker, K. Czarnecki, and A. Wąsowski. 2013. A Survey of Variability Modeling in Industrial Practice. In VaMoS. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. T. Berger, S. She, R. Lotufo, A. Wasowski, and K. Czarnecki. 2013. A Study of Variability Models and Languages in the Systems Software Domain. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 39, 12 (2013), 1611--1640. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. R. Bischoff, T. Guhl, E. Prassler, W. Nowak, G. Kraetzschmar, H. Bruyninckx, P. Soetens, M. Haegele, A. Pott, P. Breedveld, J. Broenink, D. Brugali, and N. Tomatis. 2010. BRICS -- Best practice in robotics. In ROBOTIK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. D. Brugali and P. Scandurra. 2009. Component-based robotic engineering (part i){tutorial}. Robotics & Automation Magazine, IEEE 16, 4 (2009), 84--96.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Y. Dubinsky, J. Rubin, T. Berger, S. Duszynski, M. Becker, and K. Czarnecki. 2013. An Exploratory Study of Cloning in Industrial Software Product Lines. In CSMR. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. S. Fürst, J. Mössinger, S. Bunzel, T. Weber, F. Kirschke-Biller, P. Heitkämper, G. Kinkelin, K. Nishikawa, and K. Lange. 2009. AUTOSAR--A Worldwide Standard is on the Road. In 14th International VDI Congress Electronic Systems for Vehicles.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. L. Gherardi. 2013. Variability modeling and resolution in component-based robotics systems. (2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. L. Gherardi and D. Brugali. 2011. An eclipse-based Feature Models toolchain. In 6th Italian Workshop on Eclipse Technologies (EclipseIT 2011).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. L. Gherardi and D. Brugali. 2014. Modeling and Reusing Robotic Software Architectures: the HyperFlex toolchain. In ICRA. Hong Kong, China.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. L. Gherardi, D. Hunziker, and G. Mohanarajah. 2014. Asoftware product line approach for configuring cloud robotics applications. In CLOUD. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Y. Han, J. Jeong, and J. Kim. 2012. Quadtree based path planning for Unmanned Ground Vehicle in unknown environments. In ICCAS. IEEE, 992--997.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. IFR. 2016. World Robotic Survey. https://ifr.org/ifr-press-releases/news/world-robotics-survey-service-robots-are-conquering-the-world-.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. IFR. 2018. Service robots. https://ifr.org/service-robots/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. B. Jørgensen and W. Joosen. 2003. Coping with variability in product-line architectures using component technology. In Technology of Object-Oriented Languages, Systems and Architectures.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. E.Jung, C. Kapoor, and D. Batory. 2005. Automatic code generation for actuator interfacing from a declarative specification. In IROS.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. K. Kang, M. Kim, J. Lee, and B. Kim. 2005. Feature-oriented re-engineering of legacy systems into product line assets: a case study. In SPLC. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. S.M. LaValle. 2006. Planning algorithms. Cambridge university press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. S. Liaskos, L. Jiang, A. Lapouchnian, Y. Wang, Y. Yu, J. do Prado Leite, and J. Mylopoulos. 2007. Exploring the Dimensions of Variability: a Requirements Engineering Perspective. VaMoS 7 (2007), 17--26.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. A. Lotz, J. Inglés-Romero, C. Vicente-Chicote, and C. Schlegel. 2013. Managing Run-Time Variability in Robotics Software by Modeling Functional and Nonfunctional Behavior. In EMMSAD.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. A. Lotz, J. F. Inglés-Romero, D. Stampfer, M. Lutz, C. Vicente-Chicote, and C. Schlegel. 2014. Towards a Stepwise Variability Management Process for Complex Systems: A Robotics Perspective. Int. J. Inf. Syst. Model. Des. (2014), 55--74. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. C. Menghi, C. Tsigkanos, T. Berger, and P. Pelliccione. 2019. PsALM: Specification of Dependable Robotic Missions. In ICSE.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. C. Menghi, C. Tsigkanos, T. Berger, P. Pelliccione, and C. Ghezzi. 2018. Property Specification Patterns for Robotic Missions. In ICSE. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. E. Nakagawa, P. Antonino, and M. Becker. 2011. Reference Architecture and Product Line Architecture: A Subtle but Critical Difference. In ECSA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. A. Nordmann, N. Hochgeschwender, and S. Wrede. 2014. A Survey on Domain-Specific Languages in Robotics. In SIMPAR. Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. M. Riebisch, K. Böllert, D. Streitferdt, and I. Philippow. 2002. Extending feature diagrams with UML multiplicities. In IDPT. Citeseer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. D. Di Ruscio, I. Malavolta, P. Pelliccione, and M. Tivoli. 2016. Automatic Generation of Detailed Flight Plans from High-level Mission Descriptions. In MODELS. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. P. Schillinger, M. Bürger, and D. V. Dimarogonas. 2018. Simultaneous Task Allocation and Planning for Temporal Logic Goals in Heterogeneous Multi-Robot Systems. The International Journal of Robotics Research 37, 7 (2018), 818--838. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. A. Steck, A. Lotz, and C. Schlegel. 2011. Model-driven Engineering and Run-time Model-usage in Service Robotics. In GPCE. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Z. Tewfik, F. Jean-Loup, S. Serge, Z. Mikal, D. Saadia, M. Francois, M. Nicolas, N. Cyril, K. Selma, and P. Bruno. 2016. A Toolset to Address Variability in Mobile Robotics. Journal of Software Engineeringin Robotics (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. C. Tischer, B. Boss, A. Müller, A. Thums, R. Acharya, and K. Schmid. 2012. Developing Long-Term Stable Product Line Architectures. In SPLC. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    VaMoS '19: Proceedings of the 13th International Workshop on Variability Modelling of Software-Intensive Systems
    February 2019
    116 pages
    ISBN:9781450366489
    DOI:10.1145/3302333

    Copyright © 2019 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 6 February 2019

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Acceptance Rates

    VaMoS '19 Paper Acceptance Rate14of24submissions,58%Overall Acceptance Rate66of147submissions,45%

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader