Patent Application
20210041838
The disclosure relates to a learning device, a learning method, and a program therefor.
When a material is processed and assembled by a control device such as a press machine, normally, the material cannot be restored once processed. Therefore, it is not possible to appropriately adjust the control variable while repeatedly processing the same material. Therefore, it is important to quantify the relationship between the material properties and the control input, to impart an appropriate control input when performing new processing, etc., and to obtain an appropriate control variable.
For example, Patent Document 1 discloses a press system capable of reducing the influence of variations in plate thickness when manufacturing a pressed product. The press system of Patent Document 1 includes a press machine, a plate thickness acquisition means which includes a supply device for supplying a workpiece to the press machine and which acquires the plate thickness information of the workpiece before press is performed by the press machine, and a die height setting means which sets the die height (H) of the press machine based on the plate thickness information from the plate thickness acquisition means.
[Patent Document 1] Japanese Laid-open No. 2005-211928
Incidentally, in the press system described in Patent Document 1, it is necessary to adjust the optimal die height to be set by performing trial and error for multiple times by an actual press machine for every assumed plate thickness. In a control system such as such a press system, it is conceivable to set the adjustment amount (compensation amount) of the die height by using a learned model that is learned to output an appropriate control variable such as the die height according to parameters of the object to be processed. In this case, it is conceivable to use data including the parameters of the object to be processed and an appropriate compensation amount as the teacher data. However, in a control system that actually performs processing, assembly and the like on an object to be processed of a press machine and the like, the appropriate value of the control variable such as the die height is not limited to being affected by the plate thickness but may be affected by various parameters of the object to be processed, such as the hardness, temperature and material thereof. Therefore, in order to confirm whether the compensation amount used as the teacher data is appropriate, it is necessary to perform trial and error for various objects to be processed, which requires a huge amount of time.
Therefore, the disclosure provides a technology for efficiently learning an appropriate compensation amount for generating a command value to be imparted to a control object in predictive control of a control system which performs processing, assembly and the like of an object to be processed.
A learning device according to an aspect of the disclosure is a learning device in a control system which includes: a controller which outputs a command value obtained by compensating a target value based on a compensation amount; and a control object controlled to perform a predetermined process on an object to be processed, wherein a command value output by the controller is input to the control object, and the control object outputs a control variable as a response to the command value. The learning device provides, to an adjuster including a learned model learned to output the predetermined compensation amount to the controller based on a specific parameter of the object to be processed, the learned model. The learning device includes: an evaluation part which obtains operation data including the target value, the command value, and the control variable to evaluate the quality of the control variable; a learning part which generates a candidate compensation amount based on the operation data, performs learning with the generated candidate compensation amount and the specific parameter of the object to be processed as teacher data, and generates a learned model; and a setting part which provides the learned model to the adjuster when the quality evaluated by the evaluation part is within a predetermined allowable range based on a control variable when a command value obtained by compensating a target value based on a compensation amount output by the generated learned model is imparted to the control object. According to this aspect, when the learning device generates the candidate compensation amount without actually operating the control object, the learning device may determine whether to adopt the learned model after confirming whether the learned model generated by using the candidate compensation amount outputs an appropriate compensation amount. In this way, when actually operating the control object, the learning device may eliminate inappropriate learned models while performing learning more efficiently. Further, the “parameter” includes the characteristic amount and physical amount and other arbitrary numerical information of the object to be processed. The characteristic amount is, for example, a material and the like of the object to be processed, and the physical amount is, for example, hardness, temperature or the like of the object to be processed.
Further, it may be configured that when a specific parameter of an object to be processed provided to the control object is equal to a parameter, whose evaluation has not been performed yet, of the generated learned model, the setting part outputs a compensation amount output by the generated learned model to the controller and causes the evaluation part to evaluate the quality. Further, it may be configured that the learning part performs learning again when the quality evaluated based on the compensation amount output by the generated learned model is out of the allowable range, and regenerates a learned model. In this way, inappropriate learned models may be eliminated.
Further, the learning part may be configured to generate the candidate compensation amount by data-driven control. The data-driven control may be any one of virtual reference feedback tuning (VRFT), fictitious reference iterative tuning (FRIT), and estimated response iterative tuning (ERIT). According to this aspect, by using a data-driven control method such as VRFT, FRIT, or ERIT, the learning part may generate the candidate compensation amount without obtaining the dynamic characteristic model of the control object and may generate the teacher data. In this way, the learning device may generate the candidate compensation amount without repeating the actual operations of the control object. As a result, the learning device may perform learning more efficiently without preparing or damaging the object to be processed.
A learning method according to an aspect of the disclosure is a method executed in a learning device in a control system which includes: a controller which outputs a command value obtained by compensating a target value based on a compensation amount; and a control object controlled to perform a predetermined process on an object to be processed, wherein a command value output by the controller is input to the control object, and the control object outputs a control variable as a response to the command value. The learning device provides, to an adjuster including a learned model learned to output the predetermined compensation amount to the controller based on a specific parameter of the object to be processed, the learned model. The method is executed to make the learning device perform: an evaluation step of obtaining operation data including the target value, the command value, and the control variable to evaluate the quality of the control variable; a step of generating a candidate compensation amount based on the operation data, performing learning with the generated candidate compensation amount and the specific parameter of the object to be processed as teacher data, and generating a learned model; and a step of providing the learned model to the adjuster when the quality evaluated in the evaluation step is within a predetermined allowable range based on a control variable when a command value obtained by compensating a target value based on a compensation amount output by the generated learned model is imparted to the control object.
A program according to an aspect of the disclosure is a program for operating a learning device in a control system which includes: a controller which outputs a command value obtained by compensating a target value based on a compensation amount; and a control object controlled to perform a predetermined process on an object to be processed, wherein a command value output by the controller is input to the control object, and the control object outputs a control variable as a response to the command value. The learning device provides, to an adjuster including a learned model learned to output the predetermined compensation amount to the controller based on a specific parameter of the object to be processed, the learned model.
The program operates the learning device to perform: an evaluation part for obtaining operation data including the target value, the command value, and the control variable to evaluate the quality of the control variable; a part for generating a candidate compensation amount based on the operation data, performing learning with the generated candidate compensation amount and the specific parameter of the object to be processed as teacher data, and generating a learned model; and a part for providing the learned model to the adjuster when the quality evaluated in the evaluation part is within a predetermined allowable range based on a control variable when a command value obtained by compensating a target value based on a compensation amount output by the generated learned model is imparted to the control object.
According to the disclosure, it is possible to provide a technology for efficiently learning an appropriate compensation amount for generating a command value to be imparted to a control object in predictive control of a control system which performs processing, assembly and the like of an object to be processed.
Hereinafter, embodiments according to one aspect of the disclosure (hereinafter also referred to as “the embodiments”) will be described with reference to the drawings. However, the embodiments described below are merely examples of the disclosure in all respects. It goes without saying that various improvements and modifications can be made without departing from the scope of the disclosure. That is, in implementing the disclosure, a specific configuration according to the embodiments may be appropriately adopted. Further, although the data that appears in the embodiments is described in natural language, more specifically, it is specified by a computer-recognizable pseudo language, command, parameter, machine language, or the like.
First, an exemplary scenario where the disclosure is used is described with reference to
The controller 10 generates a command value u(t) obtained by compensating a target value r(t) based on a compensation amount p output by the adjuster 30, and outputs the command value u(t) to the servo mechanism 20. The target value r(t) may be generated (the case of using a stored target value is included) by the controller 10 or may be imparted to the controller 10 from the outside. When a transfer function C(ρ) of the controller 10 is used, the controller 10 generates the command value u by performing the calculation shown in the following Equation (1).
<Calculation Formula of Controller>
u(t)=C(ρ)×r(t) Equation (1)
The servo mechanism 20 is controlled by the controller 10 to perform a predetermined process on an object to be processed (hereinafter also referred to as a “workpiece”). The command value u(t) is imparted from the controller 10 to the servo mechanism 20, and a control variable y(t) is output as a response to the input value. When the transfer function of the servo mechanism 20 is set to P, the control variable y(t) is expressed by the following Equation (2).
<Calculation Formula of Servo Mechanism>
y(t)=P×u(t) Equation (2)
Further, in the embodiment, the servo mechanism 20 is an example of a press machine that presses a workpiece with a predetermined amount of pressure, but the disclosure is not limited thereto. Further, the servo mechanism 20 is an example of the “control object” in the disclosure.
The adjuster 30 outputs the compensation amount p to be imparted to the controller 10. In the embodiment, the adjuster 30 has a learned model learned so that an appropriate compensation amount is output based on a specific parameter among the parameters of the workpiece. For example, the plate thickness of the workpiece may be used as the specific parameter. Further, the learned model may be provided by the learning device 40. Moreover, the adjuster 30 may obtain the parameters of the workpiece from a sensor (not shown). Further, the sensor may be included in the servo mechanism 20, for example.
When generating the learned model, the learning device 40 first actually operates the control system once with respect to the object to be processed which has a certain parameter α, and then obtains the relationship between the target value r(t), the command value u(t) and the control variable y(t) at this time. Next, the learning device 40 calculates a candidate compensation amount ρ* corresponding to the parameter α from these three values. The learning device 40 generates teacher data based on the calculated candidate compensation amount ρ* and the parameter α. By performing this process on multiple parameters, the learning device 40 may generate multiple pieces of teacher data having each parameter and a candidate compensation amount corresponding thereto. Then, the learning device 40 generates a learned model by performing learning with the generated one or more pieces of teacher data. In addition, whether the generated teacher data is actually used for learning may be determined based on a predetermined adoption criterion.
In generating the candidate compensation amount ρ*, the learning device 40 may use a data-driven control method such as virtual reference feedback tuning (VRFT), fictitious reference iterative tuning (FRIT), estimated response iterative turning (ERIT), or the like. In the data-driven control, the control parameter may be set by using the obtained data without obtaining the dynamic characteristic model of the control object (the servo mechanism 20 in this embodiment). By using the data-driven control method, the candidate compensation amount ρ* is generated from a set of operation data without performing repeated experiments, that is, without repeating the actual operations of the servo mechanism 20, and it is used as the teacher data. In this way, it is possible to shorten the time required to generate appropriate teacher data and to efficiently generate a learned model for outputting an appropriate compensation amount.
Here, when the candidate compensation amount ρ* generated by using the data-driven control method is learned as teacher data, the learned model obtained by learning is not necessarily limited to outputting an appropriate compensation amount. Therefore, the learning device 40 may evaluate the learned model before setting the learned model in the adjuster 30, and may set the learned model generated by the learning device 40 in the adjuster 30 when the learning device 40 may confirm that a control variable with a predetermined quality is obtained.
For example, it is assumed that learning is performed by using the parameter α of the workpiece X and the candidate compensation amount ρ* as the teacher data, and a new learned model LM* is generated. At this time, the learning device 40 generates a compensation amount ρα by using the learned model LM* generated previously when another workpiece having the same parameter α as the workpiece X is provided to the servo mechanism 20, and provides the compensation amount ρα to the controller 10. The controller 10 generates the command value u(x) based on the compensation amount ρα, and the servo mechanism 20 outputs the control variable y(x) as a response to the command value u(x). Here, if a result of evaluating the quality of the control variable y(x) by a quality evaluation part 42 indicates that the control variable y(x) is within the predetermined allowable range, the learning device 40 may set the newly generated learned model LM* in the adjuster 30. On the other hand, when the quality is out of the predetermined allowable range, and a learned model is already set in the adjuster 30, a setting part 44 does not have to update the learned model. In this way, when the learning device 40 generates the candidate compensation amount without actually operating the control object, since the learning device 40 may determine whether to adopt the learned model after confirming whether the learned model generated by using the candidate compensation amount outputs an appropriate compensation amount, the learning device 40 may eliminate inappropriate learned models while performing learning more efficiently. As a result, the learning device may perform learning more efficiently without preparing or damaging the object to be processed.
An example of the functional configuration of the learning device 40 will be described with reference to
The storage part 41 stores a reference model Td and a management table.
The reference model Td represents the transfer function of the ideal response of the control variable y(t) for the target value r(t). When the reference model Td is used, an ideal control variable (hereinafter also referred to as a “target response”) yd(t) for the target value r(t) is expressed by the following Equation (3).
<Formula of Reference Model Td>
yd(t)=Td×r(t) Equation (3)
Further, the reference model Td is not limited to the transfer function, and a model generated by machine learning based on the target value r(t) and the control variable y(t) when the servo mechanism 20 is operated without a workpiece may be used.
The management table manages the teacher data used by the learning part 43 for learning.
In addition, after a record of the new teacher data is added to the management table, if the servo mechanism 20 has not yet processed the workpiece corresponding to the record, for example, “not performed” may be registered in the evaluation result column of the management table.
In this way, the management table manages the teacher data used by the learning part 43 for learning and the evaluation results of the learned model newly generated (or updated) with the teacher data.
Further, the storage part 41 stores the learned model LM generated by the learning part 43. It is preferable that the storage part 41 stores multiple generations of the learned model generated by the learning part 43.
The quality evaluation part 42 obtains operation data from the controller 10 and the servo mechanism 20 to evaluate the quality of the control variable. A case will be described as an example in which the control variable y(t) is output by the servo mechanism 20 as a response to the command value u(t) imparted for the target value r(t) by the quality evaluation part 42. At this time, the quality evaluation part 42 inputs the target value r(t) into the reference model Td and obtains a target response yd(t) for the target value r(t).
Next, the quality evaluation part 42 performs quality conversion on the target response yd(t) and the control variable y(t) to calculate quality alternative indices. For example, the quality evaluation part 42 performs quality conversion on the target response yd(t) and the control variable y(t) to calculate the bottom dead center position and settling time. More specifically, the quality evaluation part 42 calculates the bottom dead center position from the maximum values of the target response yd(t) and the control variable y(t). Further, the quality evaluation part 42 subtracts the time when the command value reaches the target position from each of the time when the target response yd(t) enters the target position and the time when the control variable y(t) enters the target position, respectively, whereby the respective settling time is calculated. Further, the bottom dead center position is the position where the stroke length of the servo mechanism 20 is maximized. Further, the settling time is the elapsed time from when the stroke length of the servo mechanism 20 enters the settling width to when it reaches the target position, and the settling width refers to the width within a predetermined range from the target position (e.g., ±10 μm from the target position).
The quality evaluation part 42 performs quality evaluation of the control variable y(t) based on the bottom dead center position and the settling time, which are alternative indices calculated by quality conversion. For example, the quality evaluation part 42 may perform quality evaluation by determining whether the control variable y(t) is within the predetermined allowable range based on whether the bottom dead center position matches the target position or whether the bottom dead center position is included in the settling width.
Further, for example, the quality evaluation part 42 may perform quality evaluation of the control variable y(t) with an Xbar-R control chart. The Xbar-R control chart is a control chart for managing changes in average values and changes in variations of the quality evaluation object.
The learning part 43 generates the teacher data based on the candidate compensation amount ρ* calculated by using the operation data and generates the learned model. The learning part 43 preferably uses the data-driven control such as VRFT, FRIT, and ERIT when calculating the candidate compensation amount ρ*. The data-driven control is a method of setting control parameters by using data without obtaining the dynamic characteristic model of the control object (the servo mechanism 20 in this embodiment). The data-driven control such as VRFT, FRIT, and ERIT is a method that may specify the compensation amount from a set of operation data without performing repeated experiments. The set of operation data is a target value r, a command value imparted based on the target value, and a control variable output as a response to the command value.
The candidate compensation amount generation process of the learning part 43 will be described in more detail. For example, an example will be described in which the learning part 43 refers to the reference model Td and generates the candidate compensation amount ρ* based on the operation data when the servo mechanism 20 operates on an arbitrary workpiece (hereinafter referred to as the “workpiece X”) based on an arbitrary command value uini (hereinafter, the operation data when the operation is performed on the workpiece X based on the arbitrary command value uini is particularly referred to as the “operation data Y”). The command value uini is generated by compensating the target value r based on a certain compensation amount ρini. Here, when the target value included in the operation data Y is set to the target value r, the command value set to the command value uini, and the control variable set to the control variable yini, the operation data Y is expressed by {r, uini, yini}.
When calculating the candidate compensation amount ρ* with VRFT, the learning part 43 first calculates an assumed reference signal by the following Equation (4) with the inverse model Td−1 of the reference model Td.
[Mathematical Formula 1]
Further, the learning part 43 calculates a candidate compensation amount ρ* that minimizes an evaluation function Jv(ρ) expressed by the following Equation (5). Further, in Equation (5), C(ρ) represents the transfer function of the controller 10 described above.
[Mathematical Formula 2]
Jv(ρ)=|uini−C(ρ)×
In addition, when calculating the candidate compensation amount ρ* with FRIT, the learning part 43 first calculates a pseudo reference signal by the following Equation (6). Further, in Equation (6), C(ρ)−1 represents the inverse transfer function of the controller 10.
[Mathematical Formula 3]
Further, the learning part 43 calculates a candidate compensation amount ρ* that minimizes an evaluation function Jf(ρ) expressed by the following Equation (7).
[Mathematical Formula 4]
Jf(ρ)=|yini−Td×
The learning part 43 uses the calculated candidate compensation amount ρ* as the optimal compensation amount ρ′, associates it with the parameter of the workpiece X, and adds it to the management table as the teacher data. Further, the learning part 43 may be configured to perform an adoption determination for determining whether to adopt the candidate compensation amount ρ* as the optimal compensation amount ρ′. In this case, the learning part 43 determines whether the calculated candidate compensation amount ρ* satisfies a predetermined adoption criterion, and if so, adopts it as the optimal compensation amount ρ′ and adds it to the management table. The adoption criterion is, for example, whether the calculated candidate compensation amount ρ* is not a value (e.g., an outlier) deviating by a predetermined value or more from the optimal compensation amount included in the teacher data registered in the management table. Further, the adoption criterion may be that the candidate compensation amount ρ* is not a value deviating by a certain value or more from the average value of the optimal candidate amount included in the above-described teacher data, or that the candidate compensation amount ρ* is not a value deviating by a certain value or more from the maximum or minimum value of the optimal candidate amount. Further, for example, the adoption criterion may be whether the calculated candidate compensation amount ρ* is included in the range of the optimal compensation amount included in the teacher data registered in the management table.
The learning part 43 performs learning based on the teacher data registered in the management table and generates the learned model LM*. Further, the learning performed when generating the learned model may use, for example, conventional techniques of neural network or regression analysis. The learning part 43 adds the learned model LM* generated currently to the storage part 41 to store it. Further, the learning part 43 may be configured to overwrite the learned model LM stored in the storage part 41 with the learned model LM* generated currently.
Further, the learning part 43 may be configured to perform a learning necessity determination when generating the candidate compensation amount ρ*. In this case, the learning part 43 determines whether a predetermined learning necessity determination criterion is satisfied, and if so, generates the candidate compensation amount ρ* for performing learning. The predetermined learning necessity determination criterion is, for example, whether the result of the quality evaluation part 42 for the operation data Y is within the allowable range. Further, the predetermined learning necessity determination criterion may be whether the parameter of the workpiece X has been learned in the past, that is, whether the parameter of the workpiece X is outside the range of the learned parameter in the learned model currently set in the adjuster 30. Alternatively, the predetermined learning necessity determination criterion may be whether the external environment of the servo mechanism 20 when the operation is performed on the workpiece X has changed from the previous external environment. In this case, the learning part 43 may detect a change in the external environment based on an arbitrary input by the user, or may obtain image data including the external environment of the servo mechanism 20 from a sensor and detect a change in the external environment based on the obtained image data.
The setting part 44 sets the learned model LM* generated by the learning part 43 in the adjuster 30. At this time, the setting part 44 may evaluate the learned model LM* before setting the learned model LM*, and may determine whether to set it in the adjuster 30 based on the evaluation result.
For example, the setting part 44 may perform control using the learned model LM* and determine whether to set the learned model LM* in the adjuster 30 based on the quality evaluation of the control result. Specifically, for example, it is assumed that the learning part 43 performs additional learning by using the parameter α of the workpiece X and the candidate compensation amount ρ* as the teacher data, and generates a new learned model LM*. At this time, the setting part 44 generates a compensation amount ρα by using the learned model LM* generated when a workpiece having the same parameter α as the workpiece X is provided to the servo mechanism 20. The controller 10 generates the command value u(x) based on the compensation amount ρα generated by the learned model LM*, and outputs it to the servo mechanism 20. The quality evaluation part 42 performs quality evaluation of the control variable y(x) output by the servo mechanism 20 as a response to the command value u(x). According to the result of the quality evaluation, if the control variable y(x) is within the predetermined allowable range, the setting part 44 may set the newly generated learned model LM* in the adjuster 30. On the other hand, when the control variable y(x) is out of the predetermined allowable range, the setting part 44 may use the model already set in the adjuster 30 without updating the learned model.
Further, if multiple learned models LM* that have not been evaluated yet are registered in the storage part 41, for example, the setting part 44 may evaluate the learned models LM* in the order of new generation, select the learned model LM* whose evaluation result first falls in the allowable range, and set it in the adjuster 30. Further, for example, the setting part 44 may evaluate all the learned models LM*, select the learned model LM* whose evaluation result is the best, and set it in the adjuster 30.
Further, the setting part 44 may delete the learned model LM* whose evaluation is out of the predetermined allowable range from the storage part 41.
In this way, the setting part 44 evaluates the newly generated (or updated) learned model LM* before actually setting it in the adjuster 30, and since the learned model with insufficient quality is not set in the adjuster 30, it is possible to prevent the processing accuracy of the control system 1 from being lowered.
An example of the processing flow of the control system 1 according to the embodiment will be described with reference to
When the workpiece is provided to the servo mechanism 20, the compensation amount q for the target value is set (S102). The compensation amount q may be manually set by the user, or if a learned model has already been set in the adjuster 30, the learned model may be generated.
The controller 10 generates the command value u based on the set compensation amount q and outputs it to the servo mechanism 20. The servo mechanism 20 outputs the control variable y as a response to the command value u. The learning device 40 obtains the operation data [r, u, y] at this time (S103).
Next, the necessity of learning is determined (S104). For example, the learning part 43 may determine the necessity for the obtained operation data [r, u, y] based on the result of the quality evaluation performed by the quality evaluation part 42. Further, the criterion for determining the necessity of learning is not limited thereto, and whether the parameter of the current workpiece is within the range of parameters learned in the past or whether the external environment has changed may be used as the criterion. Further, for example, the necessity of learning may be determined by a person.
When it is determined that learning is unnecessary (S104: NO), the process returns to S102, and the process is performed on the next workpiece. On the other hand, when it is determined that learning is necessary (S104: YES), the learning part 43 refers to the reference model Td and generates the candidate compensation amount ρ*(S105). The learning part 43 may use a data-driven control method such as VRFT, FRIT, or ERIT when generating the candidate compensation amount ρ*.
Next, the learning part 43 determines whether to associate the generated candidate compensation amount ρ* and the parameter of the workpiece provided to the servo mechanism 20 in S102 with each other and to add them as the teacher data (S106). The adoption criterion for determining whether to add is, for example, whether the calculated candidate compensation amount ρ* is not a value deviating by a predetermined value or more from the compensation amount included in the teacher data registered in the management table. Further, for example, the adoption criterion may be whether the calculated candidate compensation amount ρ* is included in the range of the compensation amount included in the teacher data registered in the management table.
When it is determined to add (S106: YES), the learning part 43 sets the generated candidate compensation amount ρ* as the optimal compensation amount ρ′, generates a record in association with the parameter α of the workpiece provided to the servo mechanism 20 in S102, and adds the record to the management table as the teacher data (S201). On the other hand, when it is determined not to add (S106: NO), the process returns to S101, and the process is performed on the next workpiece. Further, the learning part 43 may also be configured to generate the teacher data and add it to the management table with the generated candidate compensation amount ρ* as the optimal compensation amount ρ′ as it is without performing the determination of S106.
After adding the teacher data based on the parameter α and the optimal candidate compensation amount ρ′, the learning part 43 performs additional learning and newly generates (or updates) the learned model LM* (S202).
Next, in a case where the parameter of the provided workpiece is equal to the parameter α again (S203: YES), the setting part 44 determines whether to set the generated learned model in the adjuster 30 (S205). Further, the case of being equal to the parameter α is not limited to the case of being the same as the parameter α and also includes the case of being close to the parameter α. Whether the parameters are close to each other may be determined based on whether a specific parameter is included in a predetermined range. For example, the setting part 44 determines whether to set based on the result of control performed with the learned model LM*. Specifically, the setting part 44 imparts the parameter α to the learned model LM* to generate the compensation amount ρα. Then, the setting part 44 may determine whether to set the learned model in the adjuster 30 based on the quality evaluation result of the quality evaluation part 42 for the control variable when the command value compensated based on the compensation amount ρα is imparted to the servo mechanism 20.
When the quality evaluation is within the predetermined allowable range, the setting part 44 sets the newly generated learned model in the adjuster 30 (S206). On the other hand, when the quality evaluation is out of the allowable range (S205: NO), the learning part 43 obtains the current operation data and regenerates the candidate compensation amount ρ* (S204). At this time, the learning part 43 determines whether the regenerated candidate compensation amount ρ* satisfies the adoption criterion similar to S106, and when the adoption criterion is satisfied, the candidate compensation amount ρ* is set as the optimal compensation amount ρ′, and the process returns to S201, and the learned model is generated again.
In the control system 1 according to the embodiment, the setting part 44 sets the learned model generated by the learning part 43 in the adjuster 30. At this time, the setting part 44 evaluates the learned model before setting the learned model, and determines whether to set it in the adjuster 30 based on the evaluation result. That is, in the learning device 40 according to the embodiment, learning is performed by using the candidate compensation amount generated based on the operation data, and the setting part 44 evaluates the generated learned model. For example, the setting part 44 evaluates the quality of the learned model based on the result of control using the generated learned model. In this way, the learning device 40 may use the candidate compensation amount as the teacher data without performing repeated experiments, that is, without repeating the actual operations of the control object, and it is possible to shorten the time to generate appropriate teacher data.
Next, an example of a hardware configuration when the learning device 40 described above is implemented by a computer 800 will be described with reference to
As shown in
The processor 801 controls various processes in the computer 800 by executing a program stored in the memory 803. For example, the quality evaluation part 42, the learning part 43, the setting part 44, and the like of the learning device 40 may be implemented as a program which is temporarily stored in the memory 803 and which mainly operates on the processor 801. That is, the functions of the quality evaluation part 42, the learning part 43, and the setting part 44 are implemented by the processor 801 interpreting and executing the program temporarily stored in the memory 803.
The memory 803 is a storage medium such as a random access memory (RAM). The memory 803 temporarily stores the program code of the program executed by the processor 801 and the data required when the program is executed.
The storage device 805 is a non-volatile storage medium such as a hard disk drive (HDD) or a flash memory. The storage device 805 stores an operating system and various programs for implementing each of the above configurations. In addition, the storage device 805 may also store the reference model Td and the management table. Such programs and data are loaded into the memory 803 as needed, and are referred to by the processor 801.
The input I/F part 807 is a device for receiving an input from the user. Specific examples of the input I/F part 807 include a keyboard, a mouse, a touch panel, various sensors, a wearable device, and the like. The input I/F part 807 may be connected to the computer 800 via an interface such as a universal serial bus (USB).
The data I/F part 809 is a device for inputting data from outside the computer 800. Specific examples of the data I/F part 809 include a drive device for reading data stored in various storage media and the like. The data I/F part 809 may be provided outside the computer 800. In this case, the data I/F part 809 is connected to the computer 800 via an interface such as a USB.
The communication I/F part 811 is a device for performing data communication with a device outside the computer 800 via the Internet N in a wired or wireless manner. The communication I/F part 811 may be provided outside the computer 800. In this case, the communication I/F part 811 is connected to the computer 800 via an interface such as a USB.
The display device 813 is a device for displaying various information. Specific examples of the display device 813 include a liquid crystal display, an organic electro-luminescence (EL) display, a display of a wearable device, and the like. The display device 813 may be provided outside the computer 800. In this case, the display device 813 is connected to the computer 800 via, for example, a display cable.
A configuration of a control system 2 according to another embodiment of the disclosure will be described with reference to
The control system 2 has a controller 11 instead of the controller 10 in the control system 1. Further, the adjuster 30 inputs the compensation amount p to the controller 11. Other configurations and functions are similar to those of the above-described embodiment.
The controller 11 adds the compensation amount p input by the adjuster 30 to the generated target value r(t) to generate the command value u(t), and inputs the command value u(t) to the servo mechanism 20. That is, the calculation formula of the controller 11 is the following Equation (8).
u(t)=r(t)+ρ Equation (8)
According to the controller 11, the command value may be calculated by simply adding the target value and the compensation amount without using the transfer function. In this way, it is unnecessary to design the transfer function, and it is easy to design the control model.
Although the embodiments of the disclosure have been described in detail above, the above description are merely examples of the disclosure in all aspects. It goes without saying that various improvements and modifications can be made without departing from the scope of the disclosure.
Further, in the above description, the learning device 40 has been described as a configuration for newly generating a learned model, but it may be configured to update an existing learned model. In the case of the configuration for newly generating a learned model, the learning device 40 may generate a new learned model by learning with a data set in which the currently newly generated teacher data is added to the teacher data used when the existing learned model is generated. In addition, in the case of the configuration for updating the learned model, the learning device 40 may update the learned model by performing additional learning on the existing learned model with the currently newly generated teacher data.
The whole or part of the embodiments disclosed above may be described as, but not limited to, the following appendices.
(Appendix 1)
A learning device (40) in a control system (1) which includes:
a controller (10) which outputs a command value (u) obtained by compensating a target value (r) based on a compensation amount (ρ); and
a control object (20) controlled to perform a predetermined process on an object to be processed, wherein a command value (u) output by the controller (10) is input to the control object (20), and the control object (20) outputs a control variable as a response to the command value (u),
wherein the learning device (40) provides, to an adjuster (30) including a learned model learned to output the predetermined compensation amount (ρ) to the controller (10) based on a specific parameter of the object to be processed, the learned model, and
wherein the learning device (40) includes:
an evaluation part (42) which obtains operation data including the target value (r), the command value (u), and the control variable (y) to evaluate the quality of the control variable (y);
a learning part (43) which generates a candidate compensation amount (ρ*) based on the operation data, performs learning with the generated candidate compensation amount (ρ*) and the specific parameter of the object to be processed as teacher data, and generates a learned model; and
a setting part (44) which provides the learned model to the adjuster (30) when the quality evaluated by the evaluation part (42) is within a predetermined allowable range based on a control variable (y) when a command value (u) compensated based on the compensation amount output by the generated learned model is imparted to the control object.
(Appendix 2)
The learning device (40) according to appendix 1, wherein when a specific parameter of an object to be processed provided to the control object is equal to a parameter, whose evaluation has not been performed yet, of the generated learned model, the setting part (44) outputs a compensation amount output by the generated learned model to the controller and causes the evaluation part (42) to evaluate the quality.
(Appendix 3)
The learning device (40) according to appendix 2, wherein the learning part (43) performs learning again when the quality evaluated based on the compensation amount (ρ) output by the generated learned model is out of the allowable range, and regenerates a learned model.
(Appendix 4)
The learning device (40) according to any one of appendices 1 to 3, wherein the learning part (43) generates the candidate compensation amount (ρ*) by data-driven control.
(Appendix 5)
The learning device (40) according to appendix 4, wherein the data-driven control is any one of virtual reference feedback tuning (VRFT), fictitious reference iterative tuning (FRIT), and estimated response iterative tuning (ERIT).
(Appendix 6)
A method executed in a learning device (40) in a control system (1) which includes:
a controller (10) which outputs a command value (u) obtained by compensating a target value (r) based on a compensation amount (ρ); and
a control object (20) controlled to perform a predetermined process on an object to be processed, wherein a command value (u) output by the controller (10) is input to the control object (20), and the control object (20) outputs a control variable as a response to the command value (u),
wherein the learning device (40) provides, to an adjuster (30) including a learned model learned to output the predetermined compensation amount (ρ) to the controller (10) based on a specific parameter of the object to be processed, the learned model, and
wherein the method is executed to make the learning device (40) perform:
an evaluation step of obtaining operation data including the target value (r), the command value (u), and the control variable (y) to evaluate the quality of the control variable (y);
a step of generating a candidate compensation amount (ρ*) based on the operation data, performing learning with the generated candidate compensation amount (ρ*) and the specific parameter of the object to be processed as teacher data, and generating a learned model (LM*); and
a step of providing the learned model to the adjuster when the quality evaluated in the evaluation step is within a predetermined allowable range based on a control variable when a command value obtained by compensating a target value based on a compensation amount output by the generated learned model is imparted to the control object.
(Appendix 7)
A program for operating a learning device (40) in a control system (1) which includes:
a controller (10) which outputs a command value (u) obtained by compensating a target value (r) based on a compensation amount (ρ); and
a control object (20) controlled to perform a predetermined process on an object to be processed, wherein a command value (u) output by the controller (10) is input to the control object (20), and the control object (20) outputs a control variable as a response to the command value (u),
wherein the learning device (40) provides, to an adjuster (30) including a learned model learned to output the predetermined compensation amount (ρ) to the controller (10) based on a specific parameter of the object to be processed, the learned model, and
wherein the program operates the learning device (40) to perform:
an evaluation part for obtaining operation data including the target value (r), the command value (u), and the control variable (y) to evaluate the quality of the control variable (y);
a part for generating a candidate compensation amount (ρ*) based on the operation data, performing learning with the generated candidate compensation amount (ρ*) and the specific parameter of the object to be processed as teacher data, and generating a learned model; and
a part for providing the learned model (LM*) to the adjuster when the quality evaluated in the evaluation part is within a predetermined allowable range based on a control variable when a command value obtained by compensating a target value based on a compensation amount output by the generated learned model is imparted to the control object.
| Number | Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-047865 | Mar 2018 | JP | national |
| Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| PCT/JP2019/009335 | 3/8/2019 | WO | 00 |
