cooperative optimization and navigation problems
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Cooperative Optimization and Navigation Problems

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 45

Cooperative Optimization and Navigation Problems - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 81 Views
  • Uploaded on

Cooperative Optimization and Navigation Problems. Dimitrios Hristu-Varsakelis Mechanical Engineering and Institute for Systems Research University of Maryland, College Park http://glue.umd.edu/~hristu [email protected] Joint work with: M. Egerstedt, S. B. Andersson, C. Shao.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Cooperative Optimization and Navigation Problems' - anitra


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
cooperative optimization and navigation problems

Cooperative Optimization and Navigation Problems

Dimitrios Hristu-Varsakelis

Mechanical Engineering and

Institute for Systems Research

University of Maryland, College Park

http://glue.umd.edu/~hristu

[email protected]

Joint work with:

M. Egerstedt, S. B. Andersson, C. Shao.

P.R. Kumar, P. S. Krishnaprasad,

outline
Ensembles of autonomous vehicles operating on “expansive” terrain.

Bio-inspired trajectory optimization

Language-based navigation

Report on Progress – Event-driven communication

Outline
slide4

Ensembles of Autonomous Systems

  • Examples from biology (bees, ants, fish etc.)
  • Ensembles can accomplish tasks that are impossible for an individual.
  • Coordination requires thinking about control/communication interactions.
slide5

Trajectory optimization without a map

  • A group of vehicles traveling between a fixed pair of locations
  • Terrain is unknown - no “global” map.
  • On-board sensing provides local information about vehicle’s immediate surroundings

target

vehicle

Vn-1

V1

Vn

obstacle

control station

start

PROBLEM: Given an initial path between a pair of “start” and “target” locations, find the optimal path connecting that pair, using “local” interactions between vehicles.

slide6

Trajectory optimization without a map

  • A group of vehicles traveling between a fixed pair of locations
  • Terrain is unknown - no “global” map.
  • On-board sensing provides local information about vehicle’s immediate surroundings

target

Vn-1

vehicle

V1

obstacle

Vn

control station

start

PROBLEM: Given an initial path between a pair of “start” and “target” locations, find the optimal path connecting that pair, using “local” interactions between vehicles.

slide7

Local pursuit: A biologically-inspired algorithm

k+1

k

...

K+2

...

Target

...

Start

: Initial path

: path followed by the k-th vehicle,

Theorem (on ): The iterated paths converge

to a straight line as

[Bruckstein, 92]

(on a smooth manifold M): If vehicle separation is sufficiently small, then the iterated paths converge to a geodesic.

slide8

Experimental results: with Euclidean metric

  • A collection of mobile robots with:
  • Wireless communication between neighbors
  • Sonar and odometry sensors

TARGET

START

Initial path length ~7m

Vehicle separation ~1.5m

slide9

Local Pursuit

: location of k-th vehicle

M

: Minimum-length

geodesic connecting to

Idea: Find optimal trajectory to leader and follow it momentarily.

slide10

Pursuit decreases vehicle separation

M

: Minimum-length

geodesic connecting a to b

: location of k-th vehicle

slide11

Local pursuit for more general optimal control problems

Let

Given an initial trajectory with

Find that minimizes s.t.

The k-th vehicle moves as follows:

Wait at until t=Δ(κ+1)

At time t, “follow the optimal trajectory” from to

As , iterated trajectories

converge to a local min. for

Assumptions:

uniqueness,

smoothness

slide12

Simulation: pursuit on

5m trajectory

0.7m separation

slide13

A sub-Riemannian example

fixed

5m trajectory

1.5m separation

summary and work in progress
Summary and Work in Progress
  • A biologically-inspired trajectory optimization algorithm
  • - local pursuit forms a “string” of vehicles
  • - each vehicle uses local information and
  • communicates with its closest neighbors
  • Target state and optimal trajectory are unknown
  • Local convergence
  • Experiments
  • Escaping local minima
  • Comparison with gradient descent methods
slide17

Control in a reasonably complex world

  • The problem of specifying control tasks (e.g. “go to the refrigerator and get the milk”)
  • Solving motion control problems of adequate complexity
  • Many interesting systems evolve in environments that are not smooth, simply connected, etc.
  • Using language primitives to navigate:
    • Specify control policies
    • Represent the environment (what parts do we ignore?)
motion description languages
Motion Description Languages

Atom:

Evolve under

until

Evaluate

Concatenate, encapsulate atoms to form complex strings (plans), e.g.

Def: MDLe is the formal language defined by the context free grammar

with production rules:

N: nonterminals

T: terminals

S: start symbol

ε:empty string

Fact: MDLe is context free but not regular

symbolic navigation
Keep only “interesting” details about how to navigate the world

Landmark: L = (M,x) M: map “patch”, x: coordinates

Sensor signature: L = Li if s(t) = si(t) for t in [t0,T]

Navigation

Local navigation: on a given landmark Li

Global navigation: between landmarks

Symbolic Navigation

World

M

x

a directed graph representation of a map
Represent only “interesting parts” of the world.

G = {L,E}

Li : landmarks

Eij : {i,j,Gij}

Γij: an MDLe program

Eij Eji

Idea: Replace details locally by a feedback program

A directed graph representation of a map
experiment indoor navigation
Experiment: indoor navigation

Lab 1

Lab 2

Office

Partial floor plan of 2nd floor A.V. Williams

experiment example mdle plans
{Lab2toLab1Plan (bumper)

(Atom (atIsection 0100) (goAvoid 90 40 20))

(Atom (atIsection 0010) (go 0 0.36))

(Atom (wait ) (align 7 9))

(Atom (atIsection 1000) (goAvoid 0 40 20))

(Atom (atIsection 0100) (go 0 0.36))

(Atom (wait ) (align 3 5))

(Atom (wait 7) (goAvoid 270 40 20))

(Atom (atIsection 1000) (goAvoid 270 40 20))

}

Experiment: Example MDLe plans

{Lab1toOfficePlan (bumper)

(Atom (atIsection 1001) (goAvoid 90 40 20))

(Atom (atIsection 0011) (go 0 0.36))

(Atom (wait ) (align 11 13))

(Atom (atIsection 0100) (goAvoid 180 40 20))

(Atom (wait 10) (rotate -90))

}

incorporating uncertainty
Controllers (and MDLe plans) are not always successful.

Environmental factors (moving obstacles)

System uncertainty (e.g. actuator noise)

Associate a probability density function with an MDLe plan

Enumerate the MDLe strings associated with an environment graph

G = {L,E},

Define Prob. of arriving at by executing from

Assumptions:

G is a “good” description of the world

Sensor model:

Incorporating Uncertainty
a prototype navigation problem
How do I get to a given landmark ? A prototype navigation problem

Information at “time” k

Prob. density at time k, given observations up to time k.

Probability after evaluating plan and making a new observation:

Maximize probability of arriving at a desired landmark in N “steps”

Maximize prob. of arrival at a desired landmark with minimum of “steps”

Maximize probability of arriving at desired landmark in N “steps”

example data
Example - data

with N(0,0.01) actuator noise

Example: L2 to L3 (syntax: (ξ,u))

example steer to a landmark in n steps
Example: steer to a landmark in N “steps”

X0=L1 , XF=L2, N=3

P0|0=[1/3, 1/3, 1/3]

Desired success probability set to 95%

Evolution of probability density on G

slide32

Summary and Ongoing Work

  • Language-based Control
  • The motion description language MDLe
  • “Landmark+instruction”-based descriptions of the world
  • Optimal navigation via dynamic-programming
  • Obtaining “nominal” densities for navigation
  • Software
slide33

References:

  • S. Andersson and D. Hristu-Varsakelis, “Stochastic Language-based Motion Control”, to appear, CDC 2003.
  • D. Hristu-Varsakelis, M. Egerstedt, P. S. Krishnaprasad, “On the Structural Complexity of the Motion Description Language MDLe”, to appear, CDC 2003.
  • D. Hristu-Varsakelis and P. R. Kumar, “Interrupt-based feedback control over a shared communication medium”, IEEE CDC 2002.
  • M. Egerstedt and D. Hristu-Varsakelis, “Observability and Policy Optimization for Mobile Robots”, CDC 2002
slide35
Event-Based Stabilization of

Ensembles-Users of a Shared Network

slide36

Dynamical systems as users of a shared “network”

plant

G1(s)

G2(s)

GN(s)

shared medium

K1

K2

KN

controller

  • Control of collections of systems with limited communication
  • A prototype problem in “divided attention”.
  • N=number of systems in the ensemble
  • n=max. number of feedback loops that can be closed at any time
  • How much communication time must be devoted to each system
  • to guarantee that the collection remains stable?
  • Can the ensemble be stabilized?
slide37

A feedback communication policy

  • We would like to avoid having to specify the communication policy in advance
  • (thus the need for memory, clocks)
  • How much information is needed to implement an event-driven policy?
  • Let’s define a simple rule for deciding which system(s) should be allowed to use the “network”.
  • Idea: Close loops corresponding to states that are “furthest” from the origin

Ex.: N=3, n=2

.

.

0

.

slide38

A feedback communication policy

Definition: An ensemble is δ-captured if for all i after some time

Let’s define a simple rule for deciding which system(s) should be allowed to use the “network”.

Idea: Close loops corresponding to states that are “furthest” from the origin

Ex.: N=3, n=2

.

.

0

.

For each system, find a Lyapunov function V( ) such that:

(feedback loop closed)

(feedback loop open)

slide39

Policy: (sampled CLS-e):

2’. When , set .

feedback

Policy: (open loop CLS):

1’’. At time , close the loop of the system ,

2’’. When , set .

Some possibilities for interrupt-based communication (special case n=1)

Policy: (CLS-e): Let

1. At time , close the loop of the system ,

2. When , set .

3.

slide41

A “least conservative” feedback communication policy

Policy: (MACLS e-t):

1. At time t, close the loop of the system where

2. When , repeat from step 1.

Theorem: the ensemble

is captured using CLS-e-t for t large enough, if

where

otherwise there exists a choice of dynamics with the same for which there is no stabilizing communication sequence.

An alternative communication policy:

Policy: (Control Zone e-z): Pick e>z>0.

1. At time t, close the loop of the system where

2. When , repeat from step 1.

slide43

Experiment: stabilizing a pair of pendulums

Lengths: 20cm, 45cm

Communication: 115Kbps

ρ=0.8

event based feedback control summary and work in progress
Event-based feedback control - Summary and Work in Progress
  • A class of feedback communication policies
  • - sampled Lyapunov functions
  • - continuously monitored Lyapunov functions
  • - continuously monitored state norms
  • Sufficient condition for stability
  • Stochasticity
  • Performance analysis
  • Effects of delays in the feedback loop
ad