VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY

BELAGAVI

Project phase-I and seminar

Report on

“INTERACTIVE HUMANOID ROBOT”

Submitted in the partial fulfillment of the requirement for the Phase 1 and Seminar
Bachelor of Engineering
In
“ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION ENGINEERING”
Submitted by
1. Mr.P.Maharshi Naveen 1NC16EC058
2. Mr.Sareddy Jaswanth Reddy 1NC16EC070
3. Ms.Sushmitha KR 1NC16EC086
4. Mr.Y.Vijaya Chandra Reddy 1NC16EC099

Under the Guidance of

Dr.Wilfred john Vaz
Professor

DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION ENGINEERING

NAGARJUNA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

(An Autonomous Institution under VTU, Belgavi-590014)
VENKATAGIRIKOTE, DEVANAHALLI, BENGALURU– 562 110
 2019-2020

DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION ENGINEERING

CERTIFICATE

This is to Certify that the project work entitled “INTERACTIVE HUMANOID

ROBOT” carried out by Mr.P.Maharshi Naveen(1NC16EC058), Mr. Sareddy Jaswanth
Reddy(1NC16EC070), Ms.Sushmitha KR(1NC16EC086),Mr.Y.Vijaya Chandra Reddy
(1NC16EC099) a bonafied students of Nagarjuna College of Engineering and Technology in
partial fulfillment for the project work carried out by them for the course “Project Phase-I and
Seminar” During the year 2019-2020.

It is certified that all corrections/suggestions indicated for internal assessment have been
incorporated in the report and submitted to the department library. The project report has been
approved, as it satisfies the academic requirements of project phase I and seminar work.

Signature of theGuide Signature of the Co-ordinators Signature of the HOD

Dr. Wilfred John Vaz Dr. H.Venkatesh Kumar Dr. Nagesh K N

Dr. Wilfred John Vaz

Professor Professor Professor & HOD

Internal/External Viva

Name of the Examiners Signature with date

1.

2.
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Every project begins with an idea and materializes with concrete efforts. In the
beginning, we would like to thank the almighty God and our parents who gave us the strength
and capability to work on this project and complete it successfully.

We are extremely grateful to our project guide Dr.Wilfred John Vaz Associate
Professor, Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering for guidance and
encouragement.
We extend our sincere gratitude to Dr.Nagesh K N, Professor, HOD, Electronics and
Communication Engineering, NCET, for his consistent assistance and guidance during the
the project work.

We also express our gratitude to Dr. Srikanta Murthy.K, Principal, Nagarjuna

College of Engineering and Technology for his help and support.

Finally, we express our immense pleasure and thanks to all Teaching staff and Non-
teaching staff of the Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, NCET for
their co-operation and support.

1. Mr. Maharshi Naveen 1NC16EC058

2. Mr.Sareddy Jaswanth Reddy 1NC16EC070
3. Ms.Sushmitha KR 1NC16EC086
4. Mr.Y Vijaya Chandra Reddy 1NC16EC099

Page i
 ABSTRACT

Human-Robot Interaction(HRI) has recently received considerable attention in the

academic community, in labs, in technology companies, and through the media. Because of this
attention, it is desirable to present a design of HRI to serve as a tutorial to people outside the
field and to promote discussion of a unified vision of HRI within the field. The goal of this
project is to present a unified treatment of HRI-related problems, to solve key problems. and
discuss challenge problems that are likely to shape the field soon in the future. we describe the
HRI story from multiple perspectives with an eye toward identifying themes that cross
applications. This project abstract attempts to include papers that represent a fair cross-section of
the universities, government efforts, industry labs, and countries that contribute to HRI, and a
cross-section of the disciplines that contribute to the field, such as human, factors, robotics,
cognitive psychology, and design.
The design may be for functional purposes, such as interacting with human tools and
environments, for experimental purposes, such as the study of bipedal locomotion or other
purposes. In general, humanoid robots have a torso, a head, two arms, and two legs, though some
forms of humanoid robots may model only part of the body, for example, from the waist up.
Some humanoid robots also have heads designed to replicate human facial features such as eyes
and mouths. Androids are humanoid robots built to aesthetically resemble humans.
Besides the research, humanoid robots are being developed to perform human tasks like personal
assistance, through which they should be able to assist the sick and elderly, and dirty or
dangerous jobs. Humanoids are also suitable for some procedurally-based vocations, such as
reception-desk administrators and automotive manufacturing line workers. In essence, since they
can use tools and operate equipment and vehicles designed for the human form, humanoids could
theoretically perform any task a human being can, so long as they have the proper software.
However, the complexity of doing so is immense.

Page ii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT i
ABSTRACT ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS iv
LIST OF FIGURES vi
LIST OF TABLES vii

CHAPTER NO. CHAPTER NAME PAGE NO

Chapter 1
1.1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.2 INTERACTIVE ROBOT 1-3
Chapter 2 LITERATURE SURVEY
2.1 BIOLOGICAL 4
APPROXIMATIONS
2.2 MECHANICAL VIEW 5
2.3 FABRICATION 6
Chapter 3 SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
3.1 BLOCK DIAGRAM 8
3.2 METHODOLOGY 9

Page iii
 Chapter 4
4.1 ADVANTAGES 11
4.2 CHALLENGES FACED 12

Chapter 5
CONCLUSION 13
REFERENCES 14

Page iv
 LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE NO. FIGURE NAME PAGE NO.
1.1 Humanoid Robot 3
3.1 Block Diagram 8
3.2 Humanoid Robot Testing 10

Page v
Page vi
CHAPTER 1
1.1 Introduction
The modern definition of a robot can be an electro-mechanical device that follows a set of
instructions to carry out certain jobs but literally, robot means a ‘slave’. Robots find wide
application in industries and thus are called there as industrial robots and also in sci-fi movies as
humanoids. This and coming articles will provide an introduction to the Robotics.

When we think about robotics first thing that comes to our mind is automation. Robots are
known to perform tasks automatically without much human intervention, except for initial
programming and instruction set being provided to them. The first machine, what I have seen in
my childhood when we were on a visit to a milk processing plant, most close, to be called as a
robot was a milk packaging machine. There was a roll of packaging material running through the
machine, each time half a litre of milk falls into the roll and then a mechanism in the machine
seals and cuts the packet.

1.2 Classification of Robots

Articulated - This robot design features rotary joints and can range from simple two joint
structures to 10 or more joints. The arm is connected to the base with a twisting joint. The links
in the arm are connected by rotary joints. Each joint is called an axis and provides an additional
degree of freedom, or range of motion. Industrial robots commonly have four or six axes.

Cartesian - These are also called rectilinear or gantry robots. Cartesian robots have three linear
joints that use the Cartesian coordinate system (X, Y, and Z). They also may have an attached
wrist to allow for rotational movement. The three prismatic joints deliver a linear motion along
the axis.

Cylindrical - The robot has at least one rotary joint at the base and at least one prismatic joint to
connect the links. The rotary joint uses a rotational motion along the joint axis, while the

Dept of E&C, NCET Page 1

prismatic joint moves in a linear motion. Cylindrical robots operate within a cylindrical-shaped
work envelope.

Polar - Also called spherical robots, in this configuration the arm is connected to the base with a
twisting joint and a combination of two rotary joints and one linear joint. The axes form a polar
coordinate system and create a spherical-shaped work envelope.

SCARA - Commonly used in assembly applications, this selectively compliant arm for robotic
assembly is primarily cylindrical in design. It features two parallel joints that provide compliance
in one selected plane.

Delta - These spider-like robots are built from jointed parallelograms connected to a common
base. The parallelograms move a single EOAT in a dome-shaped work area. Heavily used in the
food, pharmaceutical, and electronic industries, this robot configuration is capable of delicate,
precise movement.

1.1 Humanoid Robots

A humanoid robot is a robot with its body shape built to resemble the human body. The design
may be for functional purposes, such as interacting with human tools and environments, for
experimental purposes, such as the study of bipedal locomotion, or for other purposes. In
general, humanoid robots have a torso, a head, two arms, and two legs, though some forms of
humanoid robots may model only part of the body, for example, from the waist up. Some
humanoid robots also have heads designed to replicate human facial features such as eyes and
mouths. Androids are humanoid robots built to aesthetically resemble humans

Humanoid robots are now used as research tools in several scientific areas. Researchers study the
human body structure and behavior (biomechanics) to build humanoid robots. On the other side,
the attempt to simulate the human body leads to a better understanding of it. Human cognition is
a field of study which is focused on how humans learn from sensory information in order to
acquire perceptual and motor skills. This knowledge is used to develop computational models of
human behavior and it has been improving over time.

Dept of E&C, NCET Page 2

It has been suggested that very advanced robotics will facilitate the enhancement of ordinary
humans. See transhumanism.

Although the initial aim of humanoid research was to build better orthosis and prosthesis for
human beings, knowledge has been transferred between both disciplines. A few examples are
powered leg prosthesis for neuromuscularly impaired, ankle-foot orthosis, biological realistic leg
prosthesis and forearm prosthesis.

Besides the research, humanoid robots are being developed to perform human tasks like personal
assistance, through which they should be able to assist the sick and elderly, and dirty or
dangerous jobs. Humanoids are also suitable for some procedurally-based vocations, such as
reception-desk administrators and automotive manufacturing line workers. In essence, since they
can use tools and operate equipment and vehicles designed for the human form, humanoids could
theoretically perform any task a human being can, so long as they have the proper software.
However, the complexity of doing so is immense.

Fig 1.1 Humanoid robot

Dept of E&C, NCET Page 3

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE SURVEY
Biological Approximations
Since legged robots are inspired in animals observed in nature, a frequent approach for
their design and construction is to develop a mechatronic mimic of the animal that is intended to
replicate, either in terms of its physical dimensions, or in terms of characteristics such as the gait
and the actuation of the limbs. With this objective in mind, detailed studies of the locomotion
and anatomy of the animals have been made. Works joining researchers from the robotics and
the biology areas are often presented (Laksanacharoen, et al., 2000; Witte, et al., 2001a; Witte,
et al., 2001b; Schneider, et al., 2005). Several examples of robots that have been developed
based on this approximation are discussed in Silva and Machado (2007), for example, the
Lobster Robot, that intends to be a lobster mimic (Ayers, 2004), the CWRU Robot II
(Espenschied, et al., 1996) that represents a stick-insect and the CWRU Robot III (Nelson, et al.,
1997; Nelson and Quinn, 1998) that intends to mimic (17:1 scale) the Blaberus Discoidalis
cockroach.
This approach is also followed in the development of biped and humanoid robots. The designers
of these systems get much of their inspiration from mankind, as proved by several
machines with characteristics similar to those of humans, namely in the number of DOF and in
their dimensions.
Among the large number of examples adopting this approach one can mention the following
robots:
 the WABIAN humanoid, whose size and joint range of motion is based on an adult
human(Yamaguchi and Takanishi, 1998), as can be seen in Figure 2, left;
 the biped developed by Caldwell, et al. (1997) to test the actuation using artificial
pneumatic
muscles, that presents anthropomorphic dimensions;
 the BIP robot that presents the kinematic and dynamic parameters close to the
anthropomorphic
values of an human, with 1.70 m height and 90 kg mass (Espiau, et al., 1997);
 the Honda Humanoid Robot model P2 that, on an initially phase of development, presented
the

Dept of E&C, NCET Page 4

dimensions, joint locations, ranges of motion and centre of gravity equivalent to the human leg
(Hirai, et al., 1998). Latter, it was verified that was difficult to satisfy all the conditions, and
some
simplifications were made.
Mechanical View
The approaches to the systems design discussed in the two previous sections are
inspired in the strategies found in nature. However, it is important to keep in mind that legged
robots are machines.Therefore, the first aspect to consider in their design phase should be the
adequate implementation the mechanical and physical viewpoints. In this line of thought,
from

Habumuremyi and Doroftei (2001) compiled the characteristics of several structures that can be
adopted for the legs of artificial locomotion systems. Hirose and Arikawa (2000) examined
several concepts to be adopted during the design of legged vehicles. The main idea is to
maximize the power developed in the system (concept of ‘coupled actuation’) and to
maximize the energy efficiency (concept of ‘actuator gravitational decoupling’).The technique
of actuator gravitational decoupling (whose concept can be seen in Figure 6) was adopted in
several robots (Koyachi, et al., 1991; Senta, et al., 1995; Genta and Amati, 2001) and can be
implemented not only during the system design, but also in the posture during locomotion
(Hirose and Arikawa, 2000).
In some cases, for designing a robot, empirical knowledge of mechanics and physics is
supported as an adopted approach. The design of the equipments has the objective of minimizing
some situation penalizing the performance of the robot under consideration (Hirose, et al.,
1997; Yamaguchi and Takanishi, 1998). Optimization of Legged Robots– A Survey 12
Another method for the optimization of the robot structure based on biology research
(Alexander, 1990), considers legs equipped with actuators introducing joint compliance. In this
way, it is possible to store and to release the kinetic and the potential energies of the robot legs
and body, during the different phases of the locomotion cycle. Raby and Orin (1999) make use
of this approach with a passive hexapod robot (Figure 7). The proposed robot has legs with two
DOF, one rotational at the hip and one prismatic at the knee, having each joint a spring to
allow some compliance. After optimizing the locomotion parameters, they conclude that is
required a small amount of energy to keep the robot in the periodic locomotion.

Dept of E&C, NCET Page 5

Fabrication
Recent progress in the field of soft robotics has been enabled by the development of rapid
digital design and fabrication tools. Researchers have manufactured complex soft robotic
systems by takingng advantage of rapid and adaptable fabrication techniques, including multi
material 3D printing, shape deposition manufacturing (SDM) and soft lithography. These
techniques can be combined to create composites with heterogenous materials (e.g. rubber with
different stiffness moduli), embedded electronics, and internal channels for actuation printing
with soft materials may be another option for fabricating arbitrary soft structures. A wide range
of robot bodies can be fabricated using these techniques. The next section discussed control
systems supporting a wide range of soft robot applications.
The recognition that digital fabrication technologies can support education is not new.
Early recognition of its potential was made by architecture educators. Prof. William Mitchell at
MIT’s School of Architecture and Planning set up the first digital fabrication laboratory within
an architecture school in the late 1990s. Digital fabrication technologies were used in research to
produce scale models and for exploring new techniques in graduate elective subjects.
The emergence of digital fabrication technologies engendered early excitement about
their potential in education. .They remarked that after developing the necessary IT, modelling
and production skills, students could rapidly prototype, reducing the attachments that their felt
towards their designs, and with the ability to more easily modify their designs as new ideas
emerged.
Alongside the excitement about the educational potential of digital fabrication
technologies, there grew a recognition that their adoption would have systemic consequences for
the domain. Several further benefits of incorporating digital fabrication into teaching were
suggested. Commenting on elementary school teaching, Berry et al. (2010) believed that when
using digital fabrication in combination with a stimulating task, it could facilitate learning,
develop skills and increase student engagement. To realise this potential would require that
elementary teachers’ competence and interest in teaching STEM content be increased,
particularly with regard to engineering design and mathematics (Berry et al., 2010, pp.169-70).
Similarly, in reviewing the benefits of incorporating digital fabrication technologies into K-12
education, Smith (2013) identified prior work indicating that it can inspire creativity in students,

Dept of E&C, NCET Page 6

improve their attitudes towards STEM subjects and careers, and increase their mathematical
knowledge, while also increasing teachers’ interest and engagement.
Humanoid robot Interaction

The next several sections review current robot research and how the latest generation of
robots supports these characteristics. Research into human-robot interaction, the use of robots as
tools, robots as guides and assistants, as well as the progress being made in the development of
humanoid robots, are all examined. Finally, a variety of efforts to use robots in collaboration are
examined and analyzed in the context of the human-human model presented.
The simplest way robots can be used is as tools to aid in the completion of physical tasks.
Although there are many examples of robots used in this manner, a few examples are given that
benefit from human-robot interaction. For example, to increase the success rate of harvesting, a
human-robot collaborative system was implemented for testing by (Bechar and Edan 2003).
Results indicated that a human operator working with a robotic system with varying levels of
autonomy resulted in improved harvesting of melons. Depending on the complexity of the
harvesting environment, varying the level of autonomy of the robotic harvester increased
positive detection rates in the amount of 4.5% – 7% from the human operator alone and as much
as 20% compared to autonomous robot detection alone.
Human-robot teams are used in Urban Search and Rescue (USAR). Robots are
teleoperated and used mainly as tools to search for survivors. Studies completed on human-robot
interaction for USAR reveal that the lack of situational awareness has a negative effect on
performance (Murphy 2004), (Yanco, Drury et al. 2004). The use of an overhead camera and
automatic mapping techniques improve situational awareness and reduce the number of
navigational errors (Scholtz 2002; Scholtz, Antonishek et al. 2005). USAR is conducted in
uncontrolled, hazardous environments with adverse ambient conditions that affect the quality of
sensor and video data. Studies show that varying the level of robot autonomy and combining
data from multiple sensors, thus using the best sensors for the given situation, increases the
success rate of identifying survivors (Nourbakhsh, Sycara et al. 2005). Ohba et al. (Ohba,
Kawabata et al. 1999) developed a system where multiple operators in different locations control
the collision free coordination of multiple robots

Dept of E&C, NCET Page 7

CHAPTER 3
SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
3.1 BLOCK DIAGRAM

ACTUATORS

SPEAKER
MICROPHONE
MODULE
MODULE

MICRO CAMERA MODULE

DISPLAY
PROCESSOR UNIT
(RASPBERRY PI)

MOTOR DRIVERS

SENSORS MICRO MOTORS

CONTROLLER UNIT

POWER SUPPLY

Fig 3.1 Block Diagram

The above block diagram figure 3.1 shows the prototype design of our project. In this
there is a simple architecture . A basic set of components are embedded in this robot system.

Dept of E&C, NCET Page 8

3.2 Methodology

This robot will works on commands given by the user either it is voice commands or touch
commands from the application designed to send some ascii values through the CAN protocol
and the robot is coded accordingly such that with that ascii commands it will do certain things
like 1.Wishing 2.Guiding Visitors 3.Breifing information and we can customize the code to do
any other steps
Initially a the processor is set into active receiving mode and it will wake with commands and
do the task accordingly and it sends the data to the microcontroller. In the microcontroller the
received value is compared with all the values in the task codes. If the value matches with the
static value in the code it will perform the task which was coded under that value subset
It involves in 4 steps
1. Transition of the value
2. Receiving the value by the serial communication
3. Comparing the values with the static values in the code
4. If matches do the task accordingly
All the parallel processes are done in the processor section and internet can be accessed by this
robot using this processor.

A large body of work in the field of human-robot interaction has looked at how humans and
robots may better collaborate. The primary social cue for humans while collaborating is the
shared perception of an activity, to this end researchers have investigated anticipatory robot
control through various methods including: monitoring the behaviours of human partners using
eye tracking, making inferences about human task intent, and proactive action on the part of the
robot. The studies revealed that the anticipatory control helped users perform tasks faster than
with reactive control alone.

A common approach to program social cues into robots is to first study human-human
behaviours and then transfer the learning. For example, coordination mechanisms in human-
robot collaboration are based on work in neuroscience which examined how to enable joint
action in human-human configuration by studying perception and action in a social context
rather than in isolation. These studies have revealed that maintaining a shared representation of
the task is crucial for accomplishing tasks in groups. For example, the authors have examined the

Dept of E&C, NCET Page 9

task of driving together by separating responsibilities of acceleration and braking i.e., one person
is responsible for accelerating and the other for braking; the study revealed that pairs reached the
same level of performance as individuals only when they received feedback about the timing of
each other's actions. Similarly, researchers have studied the aspect of human-human handovers
with household scenarios like passing dining plates in order to enable an adaptive control of the
same in human-robot handovers. Most recently, researchers have studied a system that
automatically distributes assembly tasks among co-located workers to improve co-ordination.

Fig 3.2 Humanoid robot testing

Dept of E&C, NCET Page 10

CHAPTER 4

4.1 Advantages

 Faster And Stronger Than Humans

Humanoids are built to mimic humans but they tend to be faster and stronger. They
are built to navigate with ease through narrow spaces which humans can’t fit through and
execute tedious and complex tasks from various body positions. They can kneel and lean just
like humans and perform tasks that require high sophistication such as screwing or torqueing.
 Command And Control

Every manoeuvre carried out by a humanoid robot starts out as a mathematical

problem which is solved to create an algorithm which is used to program the robot. A
humanoid should be able to use it control functions to simulate a number of responses to its
environment. It uses a computing speed of milliseconds to anticipate and react to movements
done by workers at the workplace.
 Watch And Learn

Scientists have made efforts to give humanoids the capacity to self-educate

themselves by utilizing the databases and the internet to search for information. They hope to
create robots that are more independent and that can improve on their knowledge levels.
 Safety And Comfort

Humanoid robots can undertake tasks that would pose a health hazard to human
workers and therefore maintaining the safety levels at maximum. They can also undertake
jobs which human workers don’t want to do like taking care of the sick.

Dept of E&C, NCET Page 11

4.2 Challenges Faced

 Power
Most robotic devices usually run on power. They must therefore be tethered to a
power supply or use batteries. Lack of a power source inhibits the functioning of humanoid
robots.
 Dexterity

Scientists have been successful in creating robots that are capable of movement and
locomotion. Before these systems can be put into use however, they must be able to perform
functions such as manipulating door handles and be able to traverse disaster zones when
carrying out a rescue mission.
 Artificial Intelligence

Advancement in artificial intelligence is of out-most need to enable humanoid robots

to move past following simple orders. It should be developed in a way that it allows the
humanoids to choose the most relevant information from a huge pool of information that they
gather from the surrounding environment.
 Security

Humanoids, just like any other computer systems are prone to the risk of being
hacked by people with ill intentions.

Future Scope (upcoming enhancements)

 The robot can upgraded by designing some autonomous functions

 The design of the robot can be upgraded to lift pay loads
 Speech recognition can be improved for the control of the robot
 The chassis of the robot can be upgraded to lighter fibers

Dept of E&C, NCET Page 12

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION
The humanoid research is an approach to understand and realize flexible complex interactions
between robots, environment and humans.
A humanoid robot is an ideal tool for the robotics research; First of all it introduces complex
interactions due to its complex structure. It can be involved in various physical dynamics by just
changing its posture without need for a different experimental platform. This promotes a unified
approach to handling different dynamics. Since it resembles humans, we can start by applying
our intuitive strategy and investigate why it works or not. Moreover, it motivates social
interactions such as gestural communication or cooperative tasks in the same context as the
physical dynamics. This is essential for three-term interaction, which aims at fusing physical and
social interaction at fundamental levels.
Integrating human body components such as human prostheses for upper limbs, and
anthropomorphic control and behavioral schemes can approach the humanoid robotics.
The Gesture Recognizer module that runs in parallel with the face tracking module is capable of
recognizing a wide variety of gestures based on head movements. Gesture recognition is robust
due to the statistical approach we have adopted. In future the plan is to record and analyze the
head gestures of a large sample of people. The plan is also to explore the prospect of allowing
the machines to learn gestures based on observation.
The aim is to use the facial gesture recognition system in a robotic system for the disabled. The
interface will allow disabled persons to feed themselves by using facial gestures to communicate
with the helping robot.

Dept of E&C, NCET Page 13

REFERENCES
[1] W. D. Smart, “Is a common middleware for robotics possible?” in Proceedings of the
IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems Workshop on
Measures and Procedures for the Evaluation of Robot Architectures and Middleware (IROS
'07), E. Prassler, K. Nilsson, and A. Shakhimardanov, Eds., 2007.

[2] J. Kramer and M. Scheutz, “Development environments for autonomous mobile robots:
a survey,” Autonomous Robots, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 101–132, 2007.

[3] N. Mohamed, J. Al-Jaroodi, and I. Jawhar, “Middleware for robotics: a survey,” in

Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics, Automation and
Mechatronics (RAM '08), pp. 736–742, September 2008.

[4] N. Mohamed, J. Al-Jaroodi, and I. Jawhar, “A review of middleware for networked

robots,” International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, vol. 9, no. 5, pp.
139–148, 2009.

[5] M. Namoshe, N. Tlale, C. Kumile, and G. Bright, “Open middleware for robotics,” in
Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Mechatronics and Machine Vision in
Practice (M2VIP '08), pp. 189–194, Auckland, New Zealand, December 2008.

[6] D. Bakken, “Middleware,” in Encyclopedia of Distributed Computing, J. Urban and P.

Dasgupta, Eds., Kluwer Academic, Dodrecht, The Netherlands, 2001.

Dept of E&C, NCET Page 14