Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Ken Owens

dblp:51/3405 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2008
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 1 first-authorSystems, architecture and hardware · 2 · 1 first-authorSoftware engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
3D vision · 44% Autonomous driving · 44% Legged, aerial and field robots · 13%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Robotics › Autonomous driving
perception
0.012000
Passive Night Vision Sensor Comparison for Unmanned Ground Vehicle Stereo Vision Navigation · ICRA 2000
Computer vision › 3D vision
stereo vision
0.012000
Passive Night Vision Sensor Comparison for Unmanned Ground Vehicle Stereo Vision Navigation · ICRA 2000
Robotics › Legged, aerial and field robots
unmanned ground vehicle
0.012000
Passive Night Vision Sensor Comparison for Unmanned Ground Vehicle Stereo Vision Navigation · ICRA 2000

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

stereo matching · 0.0motion blur analysis · 0.0image signal-to-noise ratio analysis · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2008 NAOMI - An Experimental Platform for Multi-modeling
Trip Denton, Edward Jones, Srini Srinivasan, Ken Owens, Richard W. Buskens
MoDELS4
2002 Autonomous terrain characterisation and modelling for dynamic control of unmanned vehicles
abstract
We discuss techniques to predict the dynamic vehicle response to various natural obstacles. This method can then be used to adjust the vehicle dynamics to optimize performance (e.g. speed) while ensuring that the vehicle is not damaged. This capability opens up a new area of obstacle negotiation for UGVs, where the vehicle moves over certain obstacles, rather than avoiding them, thereby resulting in more effective achievement of objectives. Robust obstacle negotiation and vehicle dynamics prediction requires several key technologies that are discussed in this paper. We detect and segment (label) obstacles using a novel 3D obstacle algorithm. The material of each labelled obstacle (rock, vegetation, etc) is then determined using a texture or color classification scheme. Terrain load-bearing surface models are then constructed using vertical springs to model the compressibility and traversability of each obstacle in front of the vehicle. The terrain model is then combined with the vehicle suspension model to yield an estimate of the maximum safe velocity, and predict the vehicle dynamics as the vehicle follows a path. This end-to-end obstacle negotiation system is envisioned to be useful in optimized path planning and vehicle navigation in terrain conditions cluttered with vegetation, bushes, rocks, etc. Results on natural terrain with various natural materials are presented.
Ashit Talukder, Roberto Manduchi, Rebecca Castaño, Ken Owens, Larry H. Matthies, Andres Castano, Robert W. Hogg
IROS4
2000 Passive Night Vision Sensor Comparison for Unmanned Ground Vehicle Stereo Vision Navigation
abstract
One goal of the "Demo III" unmanned ground vehicle program is to enable autonomous nighttime navigation at speeds of up to 10 m.p.h. To perform obstacle detection at night with stereo vision will require night vision cameras that produce adequate image quality for the driving speeds, vehicle dynamics, obstacle sizes, and scene conditions that will be encountered. This paper analyzes the suitability of four classes of night vision cameras (3-5 /spl mu/m cooled FLIR, 8-12 /spl mu/m cooled FLIR, 8-12 /spl mu/m uncooled FLIR, and image intensifiers) for night stereo vision, using criteria based on stereo night matching quality, image signal to noise ratio, motion blur, and synchronization capability. We find that only cooled FLIRs will enable stereo vision performance that meets the goals of the Demo III program for nighttime autonomous mobility.
Ken Owens, Larry H. Matthies
ICRA1