| 1. Title of Database: Robot execution failures | |
| Note: it includes 5 different datasets; see 4. | |
| 2. Sources: | |
| (a) Creators / donors: | |
| -- Luis Seabra Lopes and Luis M. Camarinha-Matos | |
| Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Monte da Caparica, Portugal | |
| (b) Date received: April 1999 | |
| 3. Past Usage: | |
| (a) Some publications where it was described/used | |
| -- Seabra Lopes, L. (1997) "Robot Learning at the Task Level: | |
| a Study in the Assembly Domain", Ph.D. thesis, Universidade | |
| Nova de Lisboa, Portugal. | |
| -- Seabra Lopes, L. and L.M. Camarinha-Matos (1998) Feature | |
| Transformation Strategies for a Robot Learning Problem, | |
| "Feature Extraction, Construction and Selection. A Data Mining | |
| Perspective", H. Liu and H. Motoda (edrs.), | |
| Kluwer Academic Publishers. | |
| -- Camarinha-Matos, L.M., L. Seabra Lopes, and J. Barata (1996) | |
| Integration and Learning in Supervision of Flexible Assembly Systems, | |
| "IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation", 12 (2), 202-219. | |
| (b) Indication of what attribute(s) were being predicted | |
| -- The class of execution failure; see 9. | |
| (c) Indication of study's results | |
| -- Part of the results is concerned with feature transformation; see 4. | |
| -- Another set of results is concerned with evaluation of | |
| data mining algorithms. | |
| 4. Relevant Information | |
| -- The donation includes 5 datasets, each of them defining a different | |
| learning problem: | |
| - LP1: failures in approach to grasp position | |
| - LP2: failures in transfer of a part | |
| - LP3: position of part after a transfer failure | |
| - LP4: failures in approach to ungrasp position | |
| - LP5: failures in motion with part | |
| -- Feature transformation strategies | |
| In order to improve classification accuracy, a set of five feature | |
| transformation strategies (based on statistical summary features, | |
| discrete Fourier transform, etc.) was defined and evaluated. | |
| This enabled an average improvement of 20% in accuracy. The most | |
| accessible reference is [Seabra Lopes and Camarinha-Matos, 1998]. | |
| 5. Number of instances in each dataset | |
| -- LP1: 88 | |
| -- LP2: 47 | |
| -- LP3: 47 | |
| -- LP4: 117 | |
| -- LP5: 164 | |
| 6. Number of features: 90 (in any of the five datasets) | |
| 7. Feature information | |
| -- All features are numeric (continuous, although integers only). | |
| -- Each feature represents a force or a torque measured after | |
| failure detection; each failure instance is characterized in terms | |
| of 15 force/torque samples collected at regular time intervals | |
| starting immediately after failure detection; | |
| The total observation window for each failure instance was of 315 ms. | |
| -- Each example is described as follows: | |
| class | |
| Fx1 Fy1 Fz1 Tx1 Ty1 Tz1 | |
| Fx2 Fy2 Fz2 Tx2 Ty2 Tz2 | |
| ...... | |
| Fx15 Fy15 Fz15 Tx15 Ty15 Tz15 | |
| where Fx1 ... Fx15 is the evolution of force Fx in the observation | |
| window, the same for Fy, Fz and the torques; there is a total | |
| of 90 features. | |
| 8. Missing feature values: None | |
| 9. Class distribution: percentage of instances per class in each dataset | |
| -- LP1: 24% normal | |
| 19% collision | |
| 18% front collision | |
| 39% obstruction | |
| -- LP2: 43% normal | |
| 13% front collision | |
| 15% back collision | |
| 11% collision to the right | |
| 19% collision to the left | |
| -- LP3: 43% ok | |
| 19% slightly moved | |
| 32% moved | |
| 6% lost | |
| -- LP4: 21% normal | |
| 62% collision | |
| 18% obstruction | |
| -- LP5: 27% normal | |
| 16% bottom collision | |
| 13% bottom obstruction | |
| 29% collision in part | |
| 16% collision in tool | |
| 10. File format | |
| -- The file format is as follows: | |
| <Number of examples> <Example 1> <Example 2> .... <Example N> | |
| Each example is described as explained in 7. | |
| -- In order to convert the files to a more standard format, | |
| the following C program is provided: | |
| #include <stdio.h> | |
| char str[128]; | |
| main(int argc,char **argv) | |
| { | |
| FILE *f1, *f2; | |
| int i,j,Nex; | |
| int aux; | |
| f1 = fopen(argv[1],"r"); | |
| f2 = fopen(argv[2],"w"); | |
| fscanf(f1,"%d",&Nex); | |
| for(i=0; i<Nex; i++) { | |
| fscanf(f1,"%s",&str[0]); | |
| for(j=0; j<90; j++) { | |
| fscanf(f1,"%d",&aux); | |
| fprintf(f2,"%d,",aux); | |
| } | |
| fprintf(f2,"%s\n",str); | |
| } | |
| } | |