kushsaraf's picture
Add failure_dataset (robot execution failures, 5 lp*.data files)
f96a219 verified
Raw
History Blame Contribute Delete
4.68 kB
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);
}
}