N ONDETERMINISTIC U NCERTAINTY & S ENSORLESS P LANNING.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Motion and Manipulation Configuration Space. Outline Motion Planning Configuration Space and Free Space Free Space Structure and Complexity.
Advertisements

Alignment Visual Recognition “Straighten your paths” Isaiah.
Approximations of points and polygonal chains
Motion Planning for Point Robots CS 659 Kris Hauser.
CS16: Introduction to Data Structures & Algorithms
Quick Sort, Shell Sort, Counting Sort, Radix Sort AND Bucket Sort
S. J. Shyu Chap. 1 Introduction 1 The Design and Analysis of Algorithms Chapter 1 Introduction S. J. Shyu.
© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., Chapter 2 The Complexity of Algorithms and the Lower Bounds of Problems.
Convex Hulls in Two Dimensions Definitions Basic algorithms Gift Wrapping (algorithm of Jarvis ) Graham scan Divide and conquer Convex Hull for line intersections.
Mapping: Scaling Rotation Translation Warp
Continuous Collision Detection: Progress and Challenges Gino van den Bergen dtecta
1 An Efficiently Computable Metric for Comparing Polygonal Shapes Esther M. Arkin, L. Paul Chew, Daniel P. Huttenlocher, Klara Kedem, Joseph S.B. Mitchell.
Instructor: Mircea Nicolescu Lecture 13 CS 485 / 685 Computer Vision.
Planning under Uncertainty
Visual Recognition Tutorial
1 Last lecture  Configuration Space Free-Space and C-Space Obstacles Minkowski Sums.
Geometric Reasoning About Mechanical Assembly By Randall H. Wilson and Jean-Claude Latombe Presented by Salik Syed and Denise Jones.
1 Orienting Polygonal Parts without Sensors Author: Kenneth Goldberg Presented by Alan Schoen and Haomiao Huang.
2 -1 Chapter 2 The Complexity of Algorithms and the Lower Bounds of Problems.
CPSC 689: Discrete Algorithms for Mobile and Wireless Systems Spring 2009 Prof. Jennifer Welch.
3 -1 Chapter 3 The Greedy Method 3 -2 The greedy method Suppose that a problem can be solved by a sequence of decisions. The greedy method has that each.
Presented by David Stavens. Autonomous Inspection Compute a path such that every point on the boundary of the workspace can be inspected from some point.
CS485/685 Computer Vision Prof. George Bebis
1 Target Finding. 2 Example robot’s visibility region hiding region 1 cleared region robot.
CS 326A: Motion Planning Criticality-Based Motion Planning: Target Finding.
Navigation and Motion Planning for Robots Speaker: Praveen Guddeti CSE 976, April 24, 2002.
1 Computational Learning Theory and Kernel Methods Tianyi Jiang March 8, 2004.
Single Point of Contact Manipulation of Unknown Objects Stuart Anderson Advisor: Reid Simmons School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University.
Orienting Polygonal Parts without Sensors Kenneth Y. Goldberg Presented by Alan Chen.
The Complexity of Algorithms and the Lower Bounds of Problems
Solving problems by searching
Introduction to Robot Motion Planning. Example A robot arm is to build an assembly from a set of parts. Tasks for the robot: Grasping: position gripper.
1 Single Robot Motion Planning Liang-Jun Zhang COMP Sep 22, 2008.
Reflection symmetry If you can draw a line through a shape so that one half is the mirror image of the other then the shape has reflection or line symmetry.
Computer graphics & visualization Collision Detection – Narrow Phase.
CS B 659: I NTELLIGENT R OBOTICS Planning Under Uncertainty.
CSE554AlignmentSlide 1 CSE 554 Lecture 8: Alignment Fall 2014.
Zvi Kohavi and Niraj K. Jha 1 Capabilities, Minimization, and Transformation of Sequential Machines.
Constraints-based Motion Planning for an Automatic, Flexible Laser Scanning Robotized Platform Th. Borangiu, A. Dogar, A. Dumitrache University Politehnica.
Chapter 9 Superposition and Dynamic Programming 1 Chapter 9 Superposition and dynamic programming Most methods for comparing structures use some sorts.
© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., Chapter 3 The Greedy Method.
Physics 361 Principles of Modern Physics Lecture 8.
APPROXIMATION ALGORITHMS VERTEX COVER – MAX CUT PROBLEMS
CSE554AlignmentSlide 1 CSE 554 Lecture 5: Alignment Fall 2011.
Planning with Non-Deterministic Uncertainty. Recap Uncertainty is inherent in systems that act in the real world Last lecture: reacting to unmodeled disturbances.
1 of 66 KS4 Mathematics S6 Transformations. 2 of 66 A A A A A A Contents S6.1 Symmetry S6 Transformations S6.2 Reflection S6.3 Rotation S6.4 Translation.
Path Planning for a Point Robot
TKK | Automation Technology Laboratory Partially Observable Markov Decision Process (Chapter 15 & 16) José Luis Peralta.
The Lower Bounds of Problems
CSE554AlignmentSlide 1 CSE 554 Lecture 8: Alignment Fall 2013.
COMP322/S2000/L281 Task Planning Three types of planning: l Gross Motion Planning concerns objects being moved from point A to point B without problems,
UNC Chapel Hill M. C. Lin Introduction to Motion Planning Applications Overview of the Problem Basics – Planning for Point Robot –Visibility Graphs –Roadmap.
Vibratory Bowl Feeder “The real problem is not part transfer but part orientation” -Frank Riley, Bodine Corp.
Similar Figures, Day 2. Warm Up Two figures are similar if one can be obtained from the other using a sequence of transformations in the plane.
U NCERTAINTY IN S ENSING ( AND ACTION ). A GENDA Planning with belief states Nondeterministic sensing uncertainty Probabilistic sensing uncertainty.
KINEMATICS OF PARTICLES
© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., Chapter 12 On-Line Algorithms.
Autonomous Robots Robot Path Planning (3) © Manfred Huber 2008.
Planning Under Uncertainty. Sensing error Partial observability Unpredictable dynamics Other agents.
11 -1 Chapter 12 On-Line Algorithms On-Line Algorithms On-line algorithms are used to solve on-line problems. The disk scheduling problem The requests.
Common Intersection of Half-Planes in R 2 2 PROBLEM (Common Intersection of half- planes in R 2 ) Given n half-planes H 1, H 2,..., H n in R 2 compute.
Computational Geometry
CSE 554 Lecture 8: Alignment
Example robot cleared region robot’s visibility region hiding region 2
CS b659: Intelligent Robotics
ECE 448 Lecture 4: Search Intro
Robust Belief-based Execution of Manipulation Programs
Computational Geometry
Presentation transcript:

N ONDETERMINISTIC U NCERTAINTY & S ENSORLESS P LANNING

Sensing error Partial observability Unpredictable dynamics Other agents

U NCERTAINTY MODELS This class : Nondeterministic uncertainty f(x,u) -> a set of possible successors Probabilistic uncertainty P(x’|x,u): a probability distribution over successors x’, given state x, control u

U NCERTAINTY IN MOTION : R EASONING WITH STATE SETS x’ = x + ,   [-a,a] t=0 t=1 -aa t=2 -2a2a Belief State: x(t)  [-ta,ta]

B ELIEF S TATE D YNAMICS F(x,u) = { x’ | x’=f(x,u) is a possible successor } e.g., F(x,u) = [x+u- , x+u+  ]

B ELIEF S TATE D YNAMICS

S ENSORLESS P LANNING

M ARBLE IN A TILTING MAZE EXAMPLE Use natural dynamics of compliance to ensure that uncertainty stays bounded / shrinks Command Uncertain outcome On contact, certainty is increased A guaranteed solution

Q UESTIONS Is a solution possible? How is uncertainty represented / transformed? Need for actions that reduce uncertainty

G OLDBERG (1998): O RIENTING P OLYGONAL P ARTS WITHOUT S ENSING A single parallel jaw gripper can orient parts that have a polygonal convex hull.

A SSUMPTIONS : All motions appear in the plane The gripper has two parallel jaws The gripper moves orthogonally to its jaws The object’s convex hull behaves rigidly The object is presented in isolation The object is initially between the jaws Both jaws make contact simultaneously with the object Once contact is made, the jaws stay in contact with the object throughout the grasping motion. There is no friction between the jaws and the object

S QUEEZE A CTIONS Let a squeeze action, α, be the combination of orienting the gripper at angle α w.r.t. a fixed world frame, closing the jaws as far as possible, and then opening the jaws. To avoid squeezing the object right at its endpoints, a squeeze action, α, can always be followed by closing the gripper at angle α + ε, rotating it by -ε, and then opening it.

O RIENTING A R ECTANGLE A 0 0 squeeze action, followed by a 45 0 squeeze action can orient a rectangular part up to symmetry.

D IAMETER F UNCTIONS The diameter function, d:S 1 ->R, describes how the distance between jaws varies, if they were to make contact with the object at angle θ. the diameter of the grasped object at direction θ is defined to be the maximum distance between two parallel supporting lines at angle θ.

S QUEEZE F UNCTIONS The squeeze function, s:S 1 ->S 1, is a transfer function, such that if θ is the initial orientation of the object w.r.t. the gripper, then s(θ) is the object’s orientation after the squeeze action is completed. Define an s- interval to be [ a,b ), s.t. a, b are points of discontinuity in the squeeze function. Define the s- image of a set, s(Θ), to be the smallest interval containing the following set: {s(θ)|θ is in Θ}.

O RIENTING A R ECTANGLE ( CONTINUED )

S QUEEZE F UNCTIONS ( CONTINUED ) Θ 1 – is an example of an s-interval s(Θ 1 ) – is the s-image of Θ 1

O RIENTING A R ECTANGLE ( CONTINUED ) Gripper Orientatio n Possible Orientations Before the Squeeze Action Possible Orientations After the Squeeze Action

T HE A LGORITHM Goal: Given a list of n vertices describing the convex hull of a polygonal part, find the shortest sequence of squeeze actions guaranteed to orient the part up to symmetry.

T HE A LGORITHM 1) Compute the squeeze function; 2) Find the widest single step in the squeeze function and set Θ 1 equal to the corresponding s-interval; 3) While there exists an s-interval Θ s.t. |s(Θ)|<|Θ i |: Set Θ i+1 equal to the widest such s-interval Increment i ; 4) Return the list (Θ 1, Θ 2, …, Θ i ).

O RIENTING A R ECTANGLE ( CONTINUED ) The squeeze function plots illustrate steps 2 and 3 of the algorithm: The output list is: (Θ 1, Θ 2 )

R ECOVERING THE A CTION P LAN Goal: Given a list of i s-intervals (Θ 1, Θ 2, …, Θ i ) generated by the described algorithm, construct a plan, ρ i,consisting of i squeeze actions (a i, a i-1, …, a 1 ) that collapses all orientations in Θ i to the unique orientation s(Θ 1 ).

R ECOVERING THE A CTION P LAN Observe that for the list (Θ 1, Θ 2, …, Θ i,.. Θ n ): |s(Θ i+1 )|<|Θ i |, therefore we could collapse the interval s(Θ i+1 ) to a point with a single squeeze action at angle 0 if s(Θ i+1 ) could be aligned with Θ i. This can be done by rotating the gripper by: s(θ i+1 ) - θ i = a i degrees, where θ i and s(θ i+1 ) can be taken as the start of the s- interval Θ i and the start of the s-image of s(Θ i+1 ), respectively.

O RIENTING A R ECTANGLE ( CONTINUED ) One possible way of aligning s(Θ 2 ) with Θ 1 for the rectangular part example is to rotate the gripper by 45 0, which results in shifting s(Θ 2 ) by = -π/4.

A LGORITHM A NALYSIS Correctness: For any plan ρ, ρ (θ + T) = ρ (θ) + T, where T is the smallest period in the object’s squeeze function. Thus, the plan ρ orients the part up to symmetry. It also does it in the minimal number of steps (see the paper). Completeness: Given a starting s-interval, we can either find a larger s- interval that has a smaller s-image, or the starting s- interval is a period of symmetry in the squeeze function. Therefore, we can generate a sequence of s-intervals (Θ 1, Θ 2, …, Θ i ) of increasing measure. Complexity: Runs in time O ( n 2 log n ) and finds plans of length O ( n 2 ) (Note: there are newer derivations of lower complexity)

E XTENSION : P USH -G RASP A CTIONS Assuming simultaneous contact is unreliable Let a push-grasp action, α, be the combination of orienting the gripper at angle α w.r.t. a fixed world frame, translating the gripper in direction α + π/2 for a fixed distance, closing the jaws as far as possible, and then opening the jaws. Can derive a push-grasp squeeze function as before and apply the same algorithm

N ONDETERMINISM IN S ENSING Achieve goal for every possible sensor result in belief state Move Sense Minimizing # of sensor results reduces branching factor Outcomes

I NTRUDER F INDING P ROBLEM  A moving intruder is hiding in a 2-D workspace  The robot must “sweep” the workspace to find the intruder  Both the robot and the intruder are points robot’s visibility region hiding region 1 cleared region robot

D OES A SOLUTION ALWAYS EXIST ? Easy to test: “Hole” in the workspace Hard to test: No “hole” in the workspace No !

I NFORMATION S TATE  Example of an information state = (x,y,a=1,b=1,c=0)  An initial state is of the form (x,y,1, 1,..., 1)  A goal state is any state of the form (x,y,0,0,..., 0) (x,y) a = 0 or 1 c = 0 or 1 b = 0 or 1 0  cleared region 1  hidding region

C RITICAL L INE a=0 b=1 a=0 b=1 Information state is unchanged a=0 b=0 Critical line

A BCD E C RITICALITY -B ASED D ISCRETIZATION Each of the regions A, B, C, D, and E consists of “equivalent” positions of the robot, so it’s sufficient to consider a single position per region

C RITICALITY -B ASED D ISCRETIZATION A B CD E (C, 1, 1) (D, 1)(B, 1)

C RITICALITY -B ASED D ISCRETIZATION A BC D E (C, 1, 1) (D, 1)(B, 1)(E, 1)(C, 1, 0)

C RITICALITY -B ASED D ISCRETIZATION A B CD E (C, 1, 1) (D, 1)(B, 1)(E, 1)(C, 1, 0) (B, 0)(D, 1)

C RITICALITY -B ASED D ISCRETIZATION A CD E (C, 1, 1) (D, 1)(B, 1)(E, 1)(C, 1, 0) (B, 0)(D, 1) Discretization chosen explicitly to get small search trees B

R EMARKS Planners that use nondeterministic uncertainty models optimize for the worst case In general, devising good discretizations / information state representations takes a bit of ingenuity

N EXT TIME Probabilistic uncertainty