IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine - September 2019 - 106

In the afternoon, the IEEE Stan-
dards Association described various
ways in which standards groups could
work together,
and then a dis-
The focus of the
cussion ensued,
which determin-
Montréal meeting
ed the best way
was on robot
forward. During
this discussion,
terminology
there was a gen-
harmonization
eral consensus
among all partic-
among various
ipants concern-
standards
ing the value of
pursuing termi-
organizations.
nology harmoni-
zation. Specific
recommendations/comments included
the following.
1) There was agreement that the terms
and their respective definitions are
very specific and important to the
various robotics fields. Especially
for well-established standardiza-
tion efforts, it would be difficult
and likely counterproductive to
change existing definitions and
enforce their use. As such, it was
suggested that we allow groups to
maintain their current terms and
definitions but provide a mecha-
nism by which to map their terms
to similar terms in other standards
groups. The mechanism used for
this should be the focus of the
group's efforts.
2) ISO TC299 Working Group 1
(Vocabulary and Characteristics)
started a similar effort, focusing
on harmonizing terminology in
the ISO TC299 working groups.
It was suggested that we start with
this effort and expand it to ad-
dress terms in other standardiza-
tion groups.
3) It was suggested that we start with a
single term, i.e., robot, determine
a core definition for it, and then
perform the mapping to similar
terms in existing standardization
efforts. The feeling of the group
was that simply determining a
c ons e nsu s definition for robot
would be a significant and worth-
while feat.
106

*

IEEE ROBOTICS & AUTOMATION MAGAZINE

*

4) A participant with a different point
of view suggested that, instead of
providing definitions for terms, we
should supply a template with rele-
vant attributes for each term, which
an individual standards group can
populate. For example, if we were
doing this for the term robot, we
may define attributes such as de-
grees of freedom, the components
it is made of, load capacity, and
so on.
There will be follow-up meetings at
future IROS and ICRA conferences to
continue this conversation. In the
meantime, the IEEE RAS will set up a
mailing list to allow ongoing dis-
cussion meetings. Please email craig
.schlenoff@nist.gov if you are inter-
ested in joining.
In addition to the standards strategy
meeting, individual IEEE RAS working
and study groups had meetings in con-
junction with ICRA 2019.
3D Map Data Representation
Working Group Meeting
At the ICRA meeting, the 3D Map
Data Representation Working Group
nearly finalized the definition of the
standard data formats that will be
used to represent 3D maps exchanged
between robot systems, possibly to be
built by different developers. The
data formats are based on JavaScript
Object Notation (https://www.json.
org), an open-standard, text-based
file format that transmits data in a
language-independent and human-
readable way. The working group is
not seeking solutions for the efficient
processing of 3D maps but rather for
inclusively representing different
types of 3D maps and their proper-
ties, including grids (e.g., octrees),
point clouds, and polygonal meshes.
For more information about this
working group, please contact Fran-
cesco Amigoni at francesco.amigoni@
polimi.it.
Robot Task Representation
Working Group Meeting
The Robot Task Representation Work-
ing Group (P1872.1), which also met
during ICRA 2019, is striving to

SEPTEMBER 2019

define a standardized way of tasking
intelligent robotic systems. The group's
objective is to determine standard
representations of items such as
resources, constraints, tasks, and goals.
Through this shared understanding,
robotic systems from different devel-
opers will be able to cooperate to
accomplish their missions. At the
ICRA 2019 meeting, presentations
and discussions were held on each
subtopic under consideration for stan-
dardization. For more information
about this working group, please con-
tact Stephen Balakirsky at stephen.
balakirsky@gtri.gatech.edu.
Autonomous Robot Working
Group Meeting
The Autonomous Robotics Ontology
Working Group (P1872.2) also met in
Montréal during ICRA 2019. Nine
members attended. This working
group is a logical extension of IEEE
1872-2015, Standard for Ontologies for
Robotics and Automation, and extends
Core Ontologies for Robotics Automation by defining additional ontologies
appropriate for autonomous robotics
(AuR). The focus of the ICRA 2019
meeting was to discuss behaviors and
capabilities. In addition, the working
group reviewed the milestones and
progress of
● the development of standard vo-
cabularies
● the development of a functional on-
tology for AuR
● validation through case studies.
For more information about this work-
ing group, please contact Howard Li at
howard.h.li@gmail.com.
Verification of Autonomous
Systems Study Group Meeting
This study group is at the very begin-
ning of its effort to develop guide-
lines and best practices for the verifi-
cation of autonomous systems. The
focus of this effort encompasses veri-
fication problems that extend from
the specification and design stage
through the development stage to
final evaluation and testing to ensure
(continued on page 111)
https://www.json.org https://www.json.org
IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine - September 2019

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine - September 2019
