Hand–eye calibration using a target registration error model

Elvis C.S. Chen; Isabella Morgan; Uditha Jayarathne; Burton Ma; Terry M. Peters

Hand–eye calibration using a target registration error model

View Fulltext

Author(s): Elvis C.S. Chen¹ ; Isabella Morgan² ; Uditha Jayarathne¹ ; Burton Ma³ ; Terry M. Peters¹
- Affiliations: 1: Robarts Research Institute, Western University , Canada ;
  2: Biomedical Engineering , University of Waterloo , Waterloo, Ontario , Canada ;
  3: Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science , York University , Toronto, Ontario , Canada
Source: Volume 4, Issue 5, October 2017, p. 157 – 162
DOI: 10.1049/htl.2017.0072 , Online ISSN 2053-3713

This is an open access article published by the IET under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/)

Received 29/07/2017, Accepted 01/08/2017, Published 14/09/2017

Surgical cameras are prevalent in modern operating theatres and are often used as a surrogate for direct vision. Visualisation techniques (e.g. image fusion) made possible by tracking the camera require accurate hand–eye calibration between the camera and the tracking system. The authors introduce the concept of ‘guided hand–eye calibration’, where calibration measurements are facilitated by a target registration error (TRE) model. They formulate hand–eye calibration as a registration problem between homologous point–line pairs. For each measurement, the position of a monochromatic ball-tip stylus (a point) and its projection onto the image (a line) is recorded, and the TRE of the resulting calibration is predicted using a TRE model. The TRE model is then used to guide the placement of the calibration tool, so that the subsequent measurement minimises the predicted TRE. Assessing TRE after each measurement produces accurate calibration using a minimal number of measurements. As a proof of principle, they evaluated guided calibration using a webcam and an endoscopic camera. Their endoscopic camera results suggest that millimetre TRE is achievable when at least 15 measurements are acquired with the tracker sensor ∼80 cm away on the laparoscope handle for a target ∼20 cm away from the camera.

References

1. 1)
  - 12. Chen, E.C.S., Peters, T.M., Ma, B.: ‘Guided ultrasound calibration: where, how, and how many calibration fiducials’, Int. J. Comput. Assist. Radiol. Surg, 2016, 11, (6), pp. 889–898 (doi: 10.1007/s11548-016-1390-7).
2. 2)
  - 8. Daniilidis, K.: ‘Hand–eye calibration using dual quaternions’, Int. J. Robot. Res., 1999, 18, (3), pp. 286–298 (doi: 10.1177/02783649922066213).
3. 3)
  - 2. Peterhans, M., Candinas, D., Weber, S.: ‘Soft tissue navigation and liver surgery support’ (Springer, New York, NY, 2014), pp. 789–798.
4. 4)
  - 15. Ma, B., Peters, T.M., Chen, E.C.S.: ‘Estimation of line-based target registration error’. Medical Imaging 2016: Image-Guided Procedures, Robotic Interventions, and Modeling, Proc. SPIE, San Diego, CA, USA, 2016, vol. 9786.
5. 5)
  - 10. Heller, J., Havlena, M., Pajdla, T.: ‘A branch-and-bound algorithm for globally optimal hand–eye calibration’. Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Providence, RI, USA, June 2012, pp. 1608–1615.
6. 6)
  - 16. Morgan, I., Jayarathne, U., Rankin, A., et al: ‘Hand–eye calibration for surgical cameras: a procrustean perspective-n-point solution’, Int. J. Comput. Assist. Radiol. Surg., 2017, 12, (7), pp. 1141–1149 (doi: 10.1007/s11548-017-1590-9).
7. 7)
  - 19. Atherton, T.J., Kerbyson, D.J.: ‘Size invariant circle detection’, Image Vis. Comput., 1999, 17, pp. 795–803 (doi: 10.1016/S0262-8856(98)00160-7).
8. 8)
  - 11. Fitzpatrick, J.M.: ‘Fiducial registration error and target registration error are uncorrelated’. Medical Imaging 2009: Visualization, Image-Guided Procedures, and Modeling, of Proc. SPIE, Lake Buena Vista, FL, USA, 2009, vol. 7261.
9. 9)
  - 5. Schmidt, J., Niemann, H.: ‘Data selection for hand–eye calibration: a vector quantization approach’, Int. J. Robot. Res., 2008, 27, (9), pp. 1027–1053 (doi: 10.1177/0278364908095172).
10. 10)
  - 4. Thompson, S., Stoyanov, D., Schneider, C., et al: ‘Hand–eye calibration for rigid laparoscopes using an invariant point’, Int. J. Comput. Assist. Radiol. Surg., 2016, 11, (6), pp. 1071–1080 (doi: 10.1007/s11548-016-1364-9).
11. 11)
  - 7. Tsai, R.Y., Lenz, R.K.: ‘A new technique for fully autonomous and efficient 3D robotics hand/eye calibration’, IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom., 1989, 5, (3), pp. 345–358 (doi: 10.1109/70.34770).
12. 12)
  - 1. Scheuering, M., Schenk, A., Schneider, A., et al: ‘Intraoperative augmented reality for minimally invasive liver interventions’. Proc. SPIE, vol. 5029, 2003, pp. 407–417.
13. 13)
  - 3. Hughes-Hallett, A., Mayer, E.K., Marcus, H.J., et al: ‘Augmented reality partial nephrectomy: examining the current status and future perspectives’, Urology, 2014, 83, (2), pp. 266–273 (doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2013.08.049).
14. 14)
  - 13. Olsson, C., Kahl, F., Oskarsson, M.: ‘Branch-and-bound methods for Euclidean registration problems’, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 2009, 31, (5), pp. 783–794 (doi: 10.1109/TPAMI.2008.131).
15. 15)
  - 9. Dornaika, F., Horaud, R.: ‘Simultaneous robot-world and hand–eye calibration’, IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom., 1998, 14, (4), pp. 617–622 (doi: 10.1109/70.704233).
16. 16)
  - 6. Shah, M., Eastman, R.D., Hong, T.: ‘An overview of robot-sensor calibration methods for evaluation of perception systems’. Proc. Workshop on Performance Metrics for Intelligent Systems, PerMIS ‘12, College Park, MD, 2012, pp. 15–20.
17. 17)
  - 25. Zhang, Z.: ‘A flexible new technique for camera calibration’, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 2000, 22, (11), pp. 1330–1334 (doi: 10.1109/34.888718).
18. 18)
  - 14. Fitzpatrick, J.M., West, J.B., Maurer, C.R.Jr.: ‘Predicting error in rigid-body point-based registration’, IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging, 1998, 17, (5), pp. 694–702 (doi: 10.1109/42.736021).
19. 19)
  - 18. Yaniv, Z.: ‘Which pivot calibration?’. Medical Imaging 2015: Image-Guided Procedures, Robotic Interventions, and Modeling, of Proc. SPIE, Orlando, FL, USA, February 2015, vol. 9415.

Login

Not registered yet?

Share

Tools

Login to add to favourites

Key

Hand–eye calibration using a target registration error model

References

Related content