Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byGladys Pearson Modified over 9 years ago
1
CSCE 552 Spring 2011 Inverse Kinematics & AI By Jijun Tang
2
Announcements Second presentation: April 11 th and 13 th In class Each group 12 minutes What to show: Detailed designs of layers/modules/classes Progress report with demo 3D/2D Models, graphics, etc Schedules and milestones Problems and planned changes
3
Frustum and Frustum Culling
4
Hemisphere Lighting
5
Normal Mapping Example
6
Specular Lighting
7
Environmental Map
8
Inverse Kinematics FK & IK Single Bone IK Multi-Bone IK Cyclic Coordinate Descent Two-Bone IK IK by Interpolation
9
FK & IK Most animation is “forward kinematics” Motion moves down skeletal hierarchy But there are feedback mechanisms Eyes track a fixed object while body moves Foot stays still on ground while walking Hand picks up cup from table This is “inverse kinematics” Motion moves back up skeletal hierarchy
10
Example of Inverse Kinematics
11
Single Bone IK Orient a bone in given direction Eyeballs Cameras Find desired aim vector Find current aim vector Find rotation from one to the other Cross-product gives axis Dot-product gives angle Transform object by that rotation
12
Multi-Bone IK One bone must get to a target position Bone is called the “end effector” Can move some or all of its parents May be told which it should move first Move elbow before moving shoulders May be given joint constraints Cannot bend elbow backwards
13
Cyclic Coordinate Descent Simple type of multi-bone IK Iterative: Can be slow May not find best solution: May not find any solution in complex cases But it is simple and versatile: No precalculation or preprocessing needed
14
Procedures Start at end effector Go up skeleton to next joint Move (usually rotate) joint to minimize distance between end effector and target Continue up skeleton one joint at a time If at root bone, start at end effector again Stop when end effector is “close enough” Or hit iteration count limit
16
Properties May take a lot of iterations Especially when joints are nearly straight and solution needs them bent e.g. a walking leg bending to go up a step 50 iterations is not uncommon! May not find the “right” answer Knee can try to bend in strange directions
17
Two-Bone IK Direct method, not iterative Always finds correct solution If one exists Allows simple constraints Knees, elbows Restricted to two rigid bones with a rotation joint between them Knees, elbows! Can be used in a cyclic coordinate descent
18
Two-Bone IK Constraints Three joints must stay in user-specified plane: e.g. knee may not move sideways Reduces 3D problem to a 2D one Both bones must remain original length Therefore, middle joint is at intersection of two circles Pick nearest solution to current pose, or one solution is disallowed: Knees or elbows cannot bend backwards
19
Example Allowed elbow position Shoulder Wrist Disallowed elbow position
20
IK by Interpolation Animator supplies multiple poses Each pose has a reference direction e.g. direction of aim of gun Game has a direction to aim in Blend poses together to achieve it Source poses can be realistic As long as interpolation makes sense Result looks far better than algorithmic IK with simple joint limits
21
Example One has poses for look ahead, look downward (60 。 ), look right, look down and right Now to aim 54 。 right and 15 。 downward, thus 60% (54/90) on the horizontal scale, 25% (15/60) on the downward scale Look ahead (1-0.25)(1-0.6)=0.3 Look downward 0.25(1-0.6)=0.1 Look right (1-0.25) 0.6=0.45 Look down and right (0.25)(0.6)=0.15
22
IK by Interpolation results Result aim point is inexact Blending two poses on complex skeletons does not give linear blend result But may be good enough from the game perspective Can iterate towards correct aim
23
Attachments e.g. character holding a gun Gun is a separate mesh Attachment is a bone in character’s skeleton Represents root bone of gun Animate character Transform attachment bone to world space Move gun mesh to that pos+orn
24
Attachments (2) e.g. person is hanging off bridge Attachment point is a bone in hand As with the gun example But here the person moves, not the bridge Find delta from root bone to attachment bone Find world transform of grip point on bridge Multiply by inverse of delta Finds position of root to keep hand gripping
25
Artificial Intelligence: Agents, Architecture, and Techniques
26
Artificial Intelligence Intelligence embodied in a man-made device Human level AI still unobtainable The difficulty is comprehension
27
Game Artificial Intelligence: What is considered Game AI? Is it any NPC (non-player character) behavior? A single “ if ” statement? Scripted behavior? Pathfinding? Animation selection? Automatically generated environment?
28
Possible Game AI Definition Inclusive view of game AI: “ Game AI is anything that contributes to the perceived intelligence of an entity, regardless of what ’ s under the hood. ”
29
Goals of an AI Game Programmer Different than academic or defense industry 1. AI must be intelligent, yet purposely flawed 2. AI must have no unintended weaknesses 3. AI must perform within the constraints 4. AI must be configurable by game designers or players 5. AI must not keep the game from shipping
30
Specialization of Game AI Developer No one-size fits all solution to game AI Results in dramatic specialization Strategy Games Battlefield analysis Long term planning and strategy First-Person Shooter Games One-on-one tactical analysis Intelligent movement at footstep level Real-Time Strategy games the most demanding, with as many as three full-time AI game programmers
31
Game Agents May act as an Opponent Ally Neutral character Continually loops through the Sense-Think-Act cycle Optional learning or remembering step
32
Sense-Think-Act Cycle: Sensing Agent can have access to perfect information of the game world May be expensive/difficult to tease out useful info Players cannot Game World Information Complete terrain layout Location and state of every game object Location and state of player But isn ’ t this cheating???
33
Sensing: Enforcing Limitations Human limitations? Limitations such as Not knowing about unexplored areas Not seeing through walls Not knowing location or state of player Can only know about things seen, heard, or told about Must create a sensing model
34
Sensing: Human Vision Model for Agents Get a list of all objects or agents; for each: 1. Is it within the viewing distance of the agent? How far can the agent see? What does the code look like? 2. Is it within the viewing angle of the agent? What is the agent ’ s viewing angle? What does the code look like? 3. Is it unobscured by the environment? Most expensive test, so it is purposely last What does the code look like?
35
Sensing: Vision Model Isn ’ t vision more than just detecting the existence of objects? What about recognizing interesting terrain features? What would be interesting to an agent? How to interpret it?
36
Sensing: Human Hearing Model Human can hear sounds Human can recognize sounds and knows what emits each sound Human can sense volume and indicates distance of sound Human can sense pitch and location Sounds muffled through walls have more bass Where sound is coming from
37
Sensing: Modeling Hearing How do you model hearing efficiently? Do you model how sounds reflect off every surface? How should an agent know about sounds?
38
Sensing: Modeling Hearing Efficiently Event-based approach When sound is emitted, it alerts interested agents Observer pattern Use distance and zones to determine how far sound can travel
39
Sensing: Communication Agents might talk amongst themselves! Guards might alert other guards Agents witness player location and spread the word Model sensed knowledge through communication Event-driven when agents within vicinity of each other
40
Sensing: Reaction Times Agents shouldn ’ t see, hear, communicate instantaneously Players notice! Build in artificial reaction times Vision: ¼ to ½ second Hearing: ¼ to ½ second Communication: > 2 seconds
41
Sense-Think-Act Cycle: Thinking Sensed information gathered Must process sensed information Two primary methods Process using pre-coded expert knowledge Use search to find an optimal solution
42
Thinking: Expert Knowledge Many different systems Finite-state machines Production systems Decision trees Logical inference Encoding expert knowledge is appealing because it ’ s relatively easy Can ask just the right questions As simple as if-then statements Problems with expert knowledge: not very scalable
43
Finite-state machine (FSM)
44
Production systems Consists primarily of a set of rules about behavior Productions consist of two parts: a sensory precondition (or "IF" statement) and an action (or "THEN") A production system also contains a database about current state and knowledge, as well as a rule interpreter
45
Decision trees
46
Logical inference Process of derive a conclusion solely based on what one already knows Prolog (programming in logic) mortal(X) :- man(X). man(socrates). ?- mortal(socrates). Yes
47
Thinking: Search Employs search algorithm to find an optimal or near-optimal solution Branch-and-bound Depth-first Breadth-first A* pathfinding common use of search Kind of mixed
48
Depth and breadth-first
49
Thinking: Machine Learning If imparting expert knowledge and search are both not reasonable/possible, then machine learning might work Examples: Reinforcement learning Neural networks Decision tree learning Not often used by game developers Why?
50
Thinking: Flip-Flopping Decisions Must prevent flip-flopping of decisions Reaction times might help keep it from happening every frame Must make a decision and stick with it Until situation changes enough Until enough time has passed
51
Sense-Think-Act Cycle: Acting Sensing and thinking steps invisible to player Acting is how player witnesses intelligence Numerous agent actions, for example: Change locations Pick up object Play animation Play sound effect Converse with player Fire weapon
52
Acting: Showing Intelligence Adeptness and subtlety of actions impact perceived level of intelligence Enormous burden on asset generation Agent can only express intelligence in terms of vocabulary of actions Current games have huge sets of animations/assets Must use scalable solutions to make selections
53
Extra Step in Cycle: Learning and Remembering Optional 4 th step Not necessary in many games Agents don ’ t live long enough Game design might not desire it
54
Learning Remembering outcomes and generalizing to future situations Simplest approach: gather statistics If 80% of time player attacks from left Then expect this likely event Adapts to player behavior
55
Remembering Remember hard facts Observed states, objects, or players Easy for computer Memories should fade Helps keep memory requirements lower Simulates poor, imprecise, selective human memory For example Where was the player last seen? What weapon did the player have? Where did I last see a health pack?
56
Remembering within the World All memory doesn ’ t need to be stored in the agent – can be stored in the world For example: Agents get slaughtered in a certain area Area might begin to “ smell of death ” Agent ’ s path planning will avoid the area Simulates group memory
57
Making Agents Stupid Sometimes very easy to trounce player Make agents faster, stronger, more accurate Challenging but sense of cheating may frustrate the player Sometimes necessary to dumb down agents, for example: Make shooting less accurate Make longer reaction times Engage player only one at a time Change locations to make self more vulnerable
58
Agent Cheating Players don ’ t like agent cheating When agent given unfair advantage in speed, strength, or knowledge People notices it Sometimes necessary For highest difficultly levels For CPU computation reasons For development time reasons Don ’ t let the player catch you cheating! Consider letting the player know upfront No one wants to fight a stupid enemy, trade-off
59
Common Game AI Techniques A* Pathfinding Command Hierarchy Dead Reckoning Emergent Behavior Flocking Formations Influence Mapping …
60
A* Pathfinding Directed search algorithm used for finding an optimal path through the game world Used knowledge about the destination to direct the search A* is regarded as the best Guaranteed to find a path if one exists Will find the optimal path Very efficient and fast
61
Command Hierarchy Strategy for dealing with decisions at different levels From the general down to the foot soldier Modeled after military hierarchies General directs high-level strategy Foot soldier concentrates on combat
62
US Military Chain of Command
63
Dead Reckoning Method for predicting object ’ s future position based on current position, velocity and acceleration Works well since movement is generally close to a straight line over short time periods Can also give guidance to how far object could have moved Example: shooting game to estimate the leading distance
64
Emergent Behavior Behavior that wasn ’ t explicitly programmed Emerges from the interaction of simpler behaviors or rules Rules: seek food, avoid walls Can result in unanticipated individual or group behavior
65
Flocking Example of emergent behavior Simulates flocking birds, schooling fish Developed by Craig Reynolds: 1987 SIGGRAPH paper Three classic rules 1. Separation – avoid local flockmates 2. Alignment – steer toward average heading 3. Cohesion – steer toward average position
66
Formations Group movement technique Mimics military formations Similar to flocking, but actually distinct Each unit guided toward formation position Flocking doesn ’ t dictate goal positions Need a leader
67
Flocking/Formation
68
Influence Mapping Method for viewing/abstracting distribution of power within game world Typically 2D grid superimposed on land Unit influence is summed into each grid cell Unit influences neighboring cells with falloff Facilitates decisions Can identify the “ front ” of the battle Can identify unguarded areas Plan attacks Sim-city: influence of police around the city
69
Mapping Example
70
Level-of-Detail AI Optimization technique like graphical LOD Only perform AI computations if player will notice For example Only compute detailed paths for visible agents Off-screen agents don ’ t think as often
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.