The invention generally relates to the field of autonomous robots, and especially to a method which enables the robot to perform motions in unpredictable and complex environments.
The general knowledge of the skilled person in the present field is exemplified e.g. in Bekey, “Autonomous robots”, The MIT Press, 2005.
When controlling a movable object like robots, there are essentially two known methods regarding the motion generation: planning and reactive control. The skilled person is well familiar with these two concepts for motion control, see e.g. Bekey.
The planning is basically to plan or schedule optimal motions from the current to the future state. It takes some costs to compute overall motions and therefore it is difficult to react to unpredictable environments. The method is suitable for static or predictable complex environments.
On the other hand, the reactive control computes only the next state with cheaper computational costs. The resulting motions are not optimal and potentially get stuck in local minima. This method is suitable for unpredictable dynamic environments.
It is the object of the invention to propose a technique allowing a robot to perform motion even in complex and unpredictable environments.
The invention proposes the concept of “Instant Prediction” which is capable to generate motions in unpredictable complex environments by integrating these two methods.
The object is particularly achieved by the features of the independent claims. The dependent claims develop further the central idea of the present invention.
A first object of the invention relates to a controller for the motion control of a robot, the controller comprising:
The quality of the motion generated by the predicting module can be computed (using a cost function) and the target generated by the planning module is used for controlling the motion of the robot in case the quality of motion generated by the predicting module is below a preset threshold value.
The invention also relates to a robot provided with a controller as defined above.
The invention also relates to a method for controlling the motion of a robot, the method comprising the steps of:
Furthermore, the invention proposes a computer program product executing a method as set forth above when run on a computing device.
Further advantages, objects and features of the present invention will become evident for the skilled person when reading the following detailed description of a preferred embodiment of the invention, when taken in conjunction with the figures of the enclosed drawings.
The present invention relates to robots, which are provided with a (preferably on-board) computing unit (“controller”). The computing unit is functionally divided in several modules. In the following a method and a module layout according to the invention will be explained which leads in turn to a new behavior of the thus controlled robot.
Instant Prediction Scheme
The overall scheme of the instant prediction is described in
An original target signal rorg, instructing a target to be reached by the robot, is supplied e.g. from a vision signal processing system of the associated robot. The original target signal rorg is supplied to a target arbitrator module, which receives as a second input an intermediate target signal rint as well as to a planning module.
The target arbitrator module generates an actual target signal ract which is send both to a reactive controller and a predicting module.
The predicting module generates a motion μreact which is supplied both to a use plan criteria assessing module as well as an input to a start planning criteria assessing module. The start planning criteria assessing module triggers a planning module if it evaluates that the supplied motion μreact satisfies the start planning criteria.
The start planning module especially triggers the planning module if the motion μreact supplied from the prediction module indicates difficulties with future states of the robots, such as e.g. parts of the robot getting too close to obstacles or joints or actuators of the robot being too close to extreme (end) positions. The difficulties can be computed by applying a cost function on the supplied motion μreact.
It is important to note that in case the prediction module predicts a difficulty with a future state of the robot, the depicted reactive controller will continue to control the robot according to the behavior which has been predicted as leading to the difficulty. However, parallel in time with the ongoing control by the reactive controller, the planning module will be triggered to start the planning computation. The parallel control of the reactive controller and the planning computation leads to a more efficient control of the robot as the planning module can start the planning computation well before the difficult situation is reached in the real world, due to the prediction of the difficult situation done by the prediction module.
According to the invention thus the control of the robot is not stopped in case a future difficult state is predicted, but rather a planning module is triggered which is designed to compute planned motion able to avoid the future difficult state.
The planning module generates a motion solution signal sent to a intermediate target generating module generating a planned motion fitness value μplan send together with the predicted motion fitness value μreact to a use plan criteria assessing module, which uses criteria to assess whether the planned motion or the predicted motion is used as the internal target signal sent to the target arbitrator module.
The shown system uses the reactive controller to generate motion commands for actors (typically electric motors) of the robot. The prediction module simulates the future robot state using its internal model, the so-called internal prediction module model [see e.g. prior art document 2]. If the fitness value μreact (computed using a “fitness” or cost function) of the motions of the internal prediction model is insufficient, the planning module is triggered. If the fitness value μplan of another motion generated by the planning module is sufficient (i.e. exceeds a preset threshold value), the planned motion μplan is sent to the reactive controller as the actual target ract through the target arbitrator. The reactive controller then controls actors (e.g. legs, arms, head) of the robot in order to make the robot achieve the supplied target.
The elements of the scheme are described below along
During the time period until ttrig, i.e. before the planning module is triggered (which is illustrated with the hashed color in
Target Arbitrator Module
The target arbitrator is activated when a new target rorg or an intermediate target rint is given. When it receives the intermediate target, it stores the original given target rorg and sends rint to both the reactive controller and the prediction module with time intervals of ract. When the target arbitrator module receives a new given target rorg, the stored data is discarded and it sends the new given target of ract.
Reactive Controller
The reactive controller receives ract and computes the motion for the next time slice based on the robot model, the so-called internal reactive model. The resulting motion commands are sent to the robot. Usually the reactive controller comprises some controllers such as a motion controller, a joint limit avoidance controller, a collision avoidance controller and so on.
Prediction Module
The prediction module simulates the robot's future state using the internal prediction module model. The prediction μreact based on the model. This is a quality measure for the reactive motion which is simulated with the internal prediction module model. The fitness value μreact represents the complexity of the robot's environment. For example, when the internal prediction module model moves closer to physical obstacles and the model reaches a dead-lock, then the fitness value μreact is reduced.
The prediction module stops predicting until the planning is finished in order not to trigger the planning module during planning. The internal prediction module model is not necessarily identical to the internal reactive model. It can have fewer DOFs (Degree-of-Freedoms) or a longer time slice interval Δtpredict than the internal reactive model's time slice Δtreact. These contribute to saving computation time and, therefore, the prediction module can predict further into the future. In contrast, the coarseness of the internal prediction module model causes inaccuracy of the prediction. A finer model can be used in these cases:
The “start planning” criteria module determines whether to can take the available resources such as computer resources into account if these are limited.
Planning Module
The planning module generates solutions (usually trajectories) which are locally or globally optimized. Any kinds of planning module can be used here, however, faster planning module or planning modules which give a minimal solution even if they are interrupted during the computations are suitable since the time for the planning is restricted.
Intermediate Target Generator
The intermediate target generator converts the solution from the planning module to the intermediate targets rint so that the both fitness values for the reactive motion and the planned motion can be compared and the target arbitrator can deal with it. For example, in case the planning module uses configuration space and the originally given target rorg, uses the task space, the intermediate target generator converts the configuration space to task space. Based on rint it computes the fitness μplan and sends it to the “use plan” criteria.
“Use Plan” Criteria Module
The “Use plan” criteria module compare the fitness values μplan and μplan. Dependent on the fitness values, it determines which intermediate targets are used for ract.
Adaptive Planning According to the Invention
The prediction module is able to predict up to the robot future state at the time tpredict which is the prediction depth. Let the computation time for the reactive controller be Treact, for the prediction module be Tpredict and for the planning module be Tplan, respectively.
For the latency compensation, the following condition is necessary.
tpredict≧Tplan+Tpredict. (1)
Let the prediction iteration cycle for tpredict be Npredict and the computation time for one cycle be ΔTpredict. We obtain:
tpredict=NpredictΔtpredict′ (2)
Tpredict=NpredictΔTpredict. (3)
Under these conditions, Eq. (1) becomes
Tplan≦Npredict(Δtpredict−ΔTpredict). (4)
If Δtpredict−ΔTpredict is constant, Npredict restricts the computation time for the planning Tplan.
In static or certain environments, Npredict can be sufficiently large for planning. However, if the environments are dynamic or uncertain, the prediction module does not always predict the robot's future state up to tpredict because the planning module can be triggered before tpredict. The time ttrig between the start of the prediction module and the triggering of the planning module is
ttrig≦tpredict′ (5)
ttrig=NtrigΔtpredict. (6)
where Ntrig is the prediction interaction cycle for ttrig. Eq. (4) can be formulated as
Tplan≦Ntrig(Δtpredict−ΔTpredict). (7)
The planning module is able to use time Tplan for planning. When the environment can be predictable the planning module uses sufficient Ntrig and the environment is fully unpredictable, Ntrig=0, that is the system is equivalent to the reactive controller.
Preparation for Planning
While the interactive (reactive) controller is used for the motions and the planning module is not triggered, the planning module is able to pre-compute for planning when it is necessary. For example, the planning module can generate motions or compute some pre-process such as discretizing the state space in this period and update the motions according to the fitness values computed in the prediction module.
The invention proposes a prediction module which gives sufficient time to the planning module by utilizing the time from the prediction module detects a difficult situation until the real robot encounters the difficult situation. Also the prediction module sends the predicted results to the planning module so that the planning module plans effectively.
The system uses the reactive controller and when the system encounters a difficult situation, then the system uses the planning module. When the reactive controller is used for motions and the planning module is not used, the planning module computes motions in order to save computation time when the planning module is used for motions. The planning module can take sufficient time to plan motions utilizing the information which is predicted by the prediction module. All process is executed on-line.
The predictor module executes prediction of quality of the reactive motion at future time steps ti up to a max time of tpredict. If the quality value for any ti becomes smaller than a threshold value then the planning module computes a plan. The time for the planning module is given by
Tplan≦tpredict−Tpredict
Note that tpredict can be adapted to the environment.
If the reactive controller is sufficient, i.e. μreactive is greater than the preset or adaptive threshold value, the planning module precomputes motions and updates the motions based on the μreact which represents the environment.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
09160406 | May 2009 | EP | regional |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5889926 | Bourne et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
20050183569 | Solomon | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20080009957 | Gienger | Jan 2008 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1870211 | Dec 2007 | EP |
Entry |
---|
Low, Kian Hsiang et al., “A Hybrid Mobile Robot Architecture with Integrated Planning and Control”, AAMAS, Jul. 15-19, 2002, pp. 219-226. |
Vahrenkamp, Nikolaus et al., “Adaptive Motion Planning for Humanoid Robots”, International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Sep. 2008, 6 pages. |
Liu, Jindong et al., “A Hybrid Control Architecture for Autonomous Robotic Fish”, International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Oct. 9-15, 2006, 6 pages. |
Burns, Brendan; “Exploiting Structure: A Guided Approach to Sampling-Based Robot Motion Planning”, Feb. 2007. 179 pages. |
Gienger, Michael et al., “Predictive Behavior Generation—A Sensor-Based Walking and Reaching Architecture for Humanoid Robots”, 2007, 7 pages. |
European Communication/European Search Report, Oct. 22, 2009, a total of 11 pages. |
Bram Bolder et al., “Visually Guided Whole Body Interaction”, 2007 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Apr. 10-14, 2007, pp. 3054-3061. |
Witold Jacak et al., “Distributed Planning and Control of Intelligent Robot's Arm Motion Based on Symbolic and Neural Processing”, IEEE International Conference on Vancouver, BC, Canada, Oct. 22-25, 1995, pp. 2898-2903. |
Hisashi Sugiura et al., “Real-Time Collision Avoidance with Whole Body Motion Control for Humanoid Robots”, Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, San Diego, CA Oct. 29-Nov. 2, 2007, pp. 2053-2058. |
Abraham Sanchez et al., “A Reactive Lazy PRM Approach for Nonholonomic Motion Planning”, IBERAMIA-SBIA 2006 2nd International Conference, Oct. 27, 2006, pp. 542-551. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20100292835 A1 | Nov 2010 | US |