Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
184 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Learning from Local Experience: Informed Sampling Distributions for High Dimensional Motion Planning (2306.09446v1)

Published 15 Jun 2023 in cs.RO

Abstract: This paper presents a sampling-based motion planning framework that leverages the geometry of obstacles in a workspace as well as prior experiences from motion planning problems. Previous studies have demonstrated the benefits of utilizing prior solutions to motion planning problems for improving planning efficiency. However, particularly for high-dimensional systems, achieving high performance across randomized environments remains a technical challenge for experience-based approaches due to the substantial variance between each query. To address this challenge, we propose a novel approach that involves decoupling the problem into subproblems through algorithmic workspace decomposition and graph search. Additionally, we capitalize on prior experience within each subproblem. This approach effectively reduces the variance across different problems, leading to improved performance for experience-based planners. To validate the effectiveness of our framework, we conduct experiments using 2D and 6D robotic systems. The experimental results demonstrate that our framework outperforms existing algorithms in terms of planning time and cost.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (37)
  1. V. Boor, M. H. Overmars, and A. F. Van Der Stappen, “The gaussian sampling strategy for probabilistic roadmap planners,” in Proceedings 1999 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Cat. No. 99CH36288C), vol. 2.   IEEE, 1999, pp. 1018–1023.
  2. D. Hsu, T. Jiang, J. Reif, and Z. Sun, “The bridge test for sampling narrow passages with probabilistic roadmap planners,” in 2003 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (cat. no. 03CH37422), vol. 3.   IEEE, 2003, pp. 4420–4426.
  3. S. A. Wilmarth, N. M. Amato, and P. F. Stiller, “Maprm: A probabilistic roadmap planner with sampling on the medial axis of the free space,” in Proceedings 1999 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Cat. No. 99CH36288C), vol. 2.   IEEE, 1999, pp. 1024–1031.
  4. S. Rodriguez, X. Tang, J.-M. Lien, and N. M. Amato, “An obstacle-based rapidly-exploring random tree,” in Proceedings 2006 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2006. ICRA 2006.   IEEE, 2006, pp. 895–900.
  5. B. Ichter, J. Harrison, and M. Pavone, “Learning sampling distributions for robot motion planning,” in 2018 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).   IEEE, 2018, pp. 7087–7094.
  6. R. Kumar, A. Mandalika, S. Choudhury, and S. Srinivasa, “Lego: Leveraging experience in roadmap generation for sampling-based planning,” in 2019 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS).   IEEE, 2019, pp. 1488–1495.
  7. C. Chamzas, A. Shrivastava, and L. E. Kavraki, “Using local experiences for global motion planning,” in 2019 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).   IEEE, 2019, pp. 8606–8612.
  8. C. Chamzas, Z. Kingston, C. Quintero-Peña, A. Shrivastava, and L. E. Kavraki, “Learning sampling distributions using local 3d workspace decompositions for motion planning in high dimensions,” in 2021 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).   IEEE, 2021, pp. 1283–1289.
  9. C. Chamzas, A. Cullen, A. Shrivastava, and L. E. Kavraki, “Learning to retrieve relevant experiences for motion planning,” in 2022 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).   IEEE, 2022, pp. 7233–7240.
  10. R. Deits and R. Tedrake, “Computing large convex regions of obstacle-free space through semidefinite programming,” in Algorithmic Foundations of Robotics XI: Selected Contributions of the Eleventh International Workshop on the Algorithmic Foundations of Robotics.   Springer, 2015, pp. 109–124.
  11. T. Marcucci, M. Petersen, D. von Wrangel, and R. Tedrake, “Motion planning around obstacles with convex optimization,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.04422, 2022.
  12. H. Fuchs, Z. M. Kedem, and B. F. Naylor, “On visible surface generation by a priori tree structures,” in Proceedings of the 7th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, 1980, pp. 124–133.
  13. E. Plaku, L. E. Kavraki, and M. Y. Vardi, “Motion planning with dynamics by a synergistic combination of layers of planning,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 469–482, 2010.
  14. C. Scheurer and U. E. Zimmermann, “Path planning method for palletizing tasks using workspace cell decomposition,” in 2011 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.   IEEE, 2011, pp. 1–4.
  15. A. Abbadi and V. Přenosil, “Safe path planning using cell decomposition approximation,” Distance Learning, Simulation and Communication, vol. 8, pp. 1–6, 2015.
  16. A. Bhatia, L. E. Kavraki, and M. Y. Vardi, “Motion planning with hybrid dynamics and temporal goals,” in 49th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC).   IEEE, 2010, pp. 1108–1115.
  17. O. Brock and L. E. Kavraki, “Decomposition-based motion planning: A framework for real-time motion planning in high-dimensional configuration spaces,” in Proceedings 2001 ICRA. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Cat. No. 01CH37164), vol. 2.   IEEE, 2001, pp. 1469–1474.
  18. A. O. Tokuta, “Motion planning using binary space partitioning,” in Proceedings IROS’91: IEEE/RSJ International Workshop on Intelligent Robots and Systems’ 91.   IEEE, 1991, pp. 86–90.
  19. G. Mesesan, M. A. Roa, E. Icer, and M. Althoff, “Hierarchical path planner using workspace decomposition and parallel task-space rrts,” in 2018 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS).   IEEE, 2018, pp. 1–9.
  20. M. S. Paterson and F. F. Yao, “Efficient binary space partitions for hidden-surface removal and solid modeling,” Discrete & Computational Geometry, vol. 5, pp. 485–503, 1990.
  21. J. P. Van den Berg and M. H. Overmars, “Using workspace information as a guide to non-uniform sampling in probabilistic roadmap planners,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 24, no. 12, pp. 1055–1071, 2005.
  22. H. Kurniawati and D. Hsu, “Workspace importance sampling for probabilistic roadmap planning,” in 2004 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS)(IEEE Cat. No. 04CH37566), vol. 2.   IEEE, 2004, pp. 1618–1623.
  23. E. Plaku, “Region-guided and sampling-based tree search for motion planning with dynamics,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 723–735, 2015.
  24. M. Kallman and M. Mataric, “Motion planning using dynamic roadmaps,” in IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2004. Proceedings. ICRA’04. 2004, vol. 5.   IEEE, 2004, pp. 4399–4404.
  25. J. Wang, W. Chi, C. Li, C. Wang, and M. Q.-H. Meng, “Neural rrt*: Learning-based optimal path planning,” IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 1748–1758, 2020.
  26. B. Chen, B. Dai, Q. Lin, G. Ye, H. Liu, and L. Song, “Learning to plan in high dimensions via neural exploration-exploitation trees,” International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2020.
  27. A. H. Qureshi, A. Simeonov, M. J. Bency, and M. C. Yip, “Motion planning networks,” in 2019 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).   IEEE, 2019, pp. 2118–2124.
  28. R. Terasawa, Y. Ariki, T. Narihira, T. Tsuboi, and K. Nagasaka, “3d-cnn based heuristic guided task-space planner for faster motion planning,” in 2020 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).   IEEE, 2020, pp. 9548–9554.
  29. T. Jurgenson and A. Tamar, “Harnessing reinforcement learning for neural motion planning,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.00214, 2019.
  30. R. Yonetani, T. Taniai, M. Barekatain, M. Nishimura, and A. Kanezaki, “Path planning using neural a* search,” in International conference on machine learning.   PMLR, 2021, pp. 12 029–12 039.
  31. M. J. Bency, A. H. Qureshi, and M. C. Yip, “Neural path planning: Fixed time, near-optimal path generation via oracle imitation,” in 2019 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS).   IEEE, 2019, pp. 3965–3972.
  32. B. Ichter, E. Schmerling, T.-W. E. Lee, and A. Faust, “Learned critical probabilistic roadmaps for robotic motion planning,” in 2020 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).   IEEE, 2020, pp. 9535–9541.
  33. C. Zhang, J. Huh, and D. D. Lee, “Learning implicit sampling distributions for motion planning,” in 2018 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS).   IEEE, 2018, pp. 3654–3661.
  34. C. Gaebert and U. Thomas, “Learning-based adaptive sampling for manipulator motion planning,” in 2022 IEEE 18th International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE).   IEEE, 2022, pp. 715–721.
  35. S. M. LaValle and J. J. Kuffner Jr, “Randomized kinodynamic planning,” The international journal of robotics research, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 378–400, 2001.
  36. S. Karaman and E. Frazzoli, “Sampling-based algorithms for optimal motion planning,” The international journal of robotics research, vol. 30, no. 7, pp. 846–894, 2011.
  37. J. J. Kuffner and S. M. LaValle, “Rrt-connect: An efficient approach to single-query path planning,” in Proceedings 2000 ICRA. Millennium Conference. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. Symposia Proceedings (Cat. No. 00CH37065), vol. 2.   IEEE, 2000, pp. 995–1001.
Citations (1)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now