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

Towards Efficient MPPI Trajectory Generation with Unscented Guidance: U-MPPI Control Strategy (2306.12369v3)

Published 21 Jun 2023 in cs.RO, cs.SY, and eess.SY

Abstract: The classical Model Predictive Path Integral (MPPI) control framework, while effective in many applications, lacks reliable safety features due to its reliance on a risk-neutral trajectory evaluation technique, which can present challenges for safety-critical applications such as autonomous driving. Furthermore, when the majority of MPPI sampled trajectories concentrate in high-cost regions, it may generate an infeasible control sequence. To address this challenge, we propose the U-MPPI control strategy, a novel methodology that can effectively manage system uncertainties while integrating a more efficient trajectory sampling strategy. The core concept is to leverage the Unscented Transform (UT) to propagate not only the mean but also the covariance of the system dynamics, going beyond the traditional MPPI method. As a result, it introduces a novel and more efficient trajectory sampling strategy, significantly enhancing state-space exploration and ultimately reducing the risk of being trapped in local minima. Furthermore, by leveraging the uncertainty information provided by UT, we incorporate a risk-sensitive cost function that explicitly accounts for risk or uncertainty throughout the trajectory evaluation process, resulting in a more resilient control system capable of handling uncertain conditions. By conducting extensive simulations of 2D aggressive autonomous navigation in both known and unknown cluttered environments, we verify the efficiency and robustness of our proposed U-MPPI control strategy compared to the baseline MPPI. We further validate the practicality of U-MPPI through real-world demonstrations in unknown cluttered environments, showcasing its superior ability to incorporate both the UT and local costmap into the optimization problem without introducing additional complexity.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (30)
  1. H. Kurniawati, Y. Du, D. Hsu, and W. S. Lee, “Motion planning under uncertainty for robotic tasks with long time horizons,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 308–323, 2011.
  2. A. Bemporad and M. Morari, “Robust model predictive control: A survey,” in Robustness in identification and control.   Springer, 2007, pp. 207–226.
  3. A. Mesbah, “Stochastic model predictive control: An overview and perspectives for future research,” IEEE Control Systems Magazine, vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 30–44, 2016.
  4. N. E. Du Toit and J. W. Burdick, “Probabilistic collision checking with chance constraints,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 809–815, 2011.
  5. L. Hewing and M. N. Zeilinger, “Stochastic model predictive control for linear systems using probabilistic reachable sets,” in 2018 IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC).   IEEE, 2018, pp. 5182–5188.
  6. S. A. Sajadi-Alamdari, H. Voos, and M. Darouach, “Risk-averse stochastic nonlinear model predictive control for real-time safety-critical systems,” IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 5991–5997, 2017.
  7. X. Yang and J. Maciejowski, “Risk-sensitive model predictive control with gaussian process models,” IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 48, no. 28, pp. 374–379, 2015.
  8. E. Hyeon, Y. Kim, and A. G. Stefanopoulou, “Fast risk-sensitive model predictive control for systems with time-series forecasting uncertainties,” in 2020 59th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC).   IEEE, 2020, pp. 2515–2520.
  9. M. Schuurmans, A. Katriniok, H. E. Tseng, and P. Patrinos, “Learning-based risk-averse model predictive control for adaptive cruise control with stochastic driver models,” IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 15 128–15 133, 2020.
  10. I. S. Mohamed, G. Allibert, and P. Martinet, “Model predictive path integral control framework for partially observable navigation: A quadrotor case study,” in 16th Int. Conf. on Control, Automation, Robotics and Vision (ICARCV), Shenzhen, China, Dec. 2020, pp. 196–203.
  11. G. Williams, A. Aldrich, and E. A. Theodorou, “Model predictive path integral control: From theory to parallel computation,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 344–357, 2017.
  12. I. S. Mohamed, G. Allibert, and P. Martinet, “Sampling-based MPC for constrained vision based control,” in IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf. on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2021, pp. 3753–3758.
  13. J. Pravitra, K. A. Ackerman, C. Cao, N. Hovakimyan, and E. A. Theodorou, “ℒ1subscriptℒ1\mathcal{L}_{1}caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-adaptive MPPI architecture for robust and agile control of multirotors,” in IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf. on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2020, pp. 7661–7666.
  14. I. S. Mohamed, “MPPI-VS: Sampling-based model predictive control strategy for constrained image-based and position-based visual servoing,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.04925, 2021.
  15. J. Yin, Z. Zhang, E. Theodorou, and P. Tsiotras, “Trajectory distribution control for model predictive path integral control using covariance steering,” in IEEE Int. Conf. on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2022, pp. 1478–1484.
  16. I. S. Mohamed, K. Yin, and L. Liu, “Autonomous navigation of AGVs in unknown cluttered environments: log-MPPI control strategy,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 10 240–10 247, 2022.
  17. G. Williams, B. Goldfain, P. Drews, K. Saigol, J. M. Rehg, and E. A. Theodorou, “Robust sampling based model predictive control with sparse objective information,” in Robotics: Science and Systems, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA, 2018, pp. 42––51.
  18. J. Yin, Z. Zhang, and P. Tsiotras, “Risk-aware model predictive path integral control using conditional value-at-risk,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.12842, 2022.
  19. I. M. Ross, R. J. Proulx, and M. Karpenko, “Unscented guidance,” in American Control Conference (ACC).   IEEE, 2015, pp. 5605–5610.
  20. A. Savitzky and M. J. Golay, “Smoothing and differentiation of data by simplified least squares procedures.” Analytical chemistry, vol. 36, no. 8, pp. 1627–1639, 1964.
  21. S. J. Julier, J. K. Uhlmann, and H. F. Durrant-Whyte, “A new approach for filtering nonlinear systems,” in Proceedings of 1995 American Control Conference-ACC’95, vol. 3.   IEEE, 1995, pp. 1628–1632.
  22. J. Xu, K. Yin, and L. Liu, “Online planning in uncertain and dynamic environment in the presence of multiple mobile vehicles,” in IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2020, pp. 2410–2416.
  23. R. Van Der Merwe, “Sigma-point kalman filters for probabilistic inference in dynamic state-space models,” Ph.D. dissertation, Oregon Health & Science University, 2004.
  24. S. J. Julier, “The scaled unscented transformation,” in American Control Conference, vol. 6.   IEEE, 2002, pp. 4555–4559.
  25. I. M. Ross, R. J. Proulx, and M. Karpenko, “Unscented optimal control for space flight,” in International Symposium on Space Flight Dynamics (ISSFD), 2014, pp. 1–12.
  26. N. Ozaki, S. Campagnola, and R. Funase, “Tube stochastic optimal control for nonlinear constrained trajectory optimization problems,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2020.
  27. P. Whittle, “Risk-sensitive linear/quadratic/gaussian control,” Advances in Applied Probability, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 764–777, 1981.
  28. G. Williams, P. Drews, B. Goldfain, J. M. Rehg, and E. A. Theodorou, “Information-theoretic model predictive control: Theory and applications to autonomous driving,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 1603–1622, 2018.
  29. J. Zhang and S. Singh, “LOAM: Lidar odometry and mapping in real-time.” in Robotics: Science and Systems, vol. 2, no. 9.   Berkeley, CA, 2014, pp. 1–9.
  30. M. Ali and L. Liu, “GP-frontier for local mapless navigation,” in IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2023, pp. 10 047–10 053.
Citations (8)

Summary

  • The paper presents a novel U-MPPI strategy that integrates the Unscented Transform to propagate both mean and covariance, improving trajectory exploration.
  • The approach incorporates a risk-sensitive cost function that dynamically adjusts penalties based on uncertainty, balancing performance and safety.
  • Extensive simulations and real-world tests demonstrate higher task completion and more collision-free trajectories in complex, cluttered navigation scenarios.

Overview of U-MPPI Control Strategy

The paper presents the U-MPPI control strategy, an enhancement of the Model Predictive Path Integral (MPPI) framework aimed at improving system safety and trajectory efficiency in dynamic environments. By integrating the Unscented Transform (UT) into MPPI, the proposed U-MPPI strategy addresses some inherent limitations of classical MPPI, particularly its risk-neutral stance and tendency to sample trajectories within high-cost regions, which can compromise safety in autonomous navigation tasks.

Core Innovations:

  1. Unscented-Based Trajectory Sampling:
    • Classical MPPI samples trajectories based on the mean control sequence disturbed by Gaussian noise, focusing solely on the mean of system dynamics. U-MPPI, however, leverages UT to propagate both the mean and covariance of system states. This propagation is achieved through a novel sampling strategy that covers a broader state space, enhancing the algorithm's exploration capabilities and reducing the risk of local minima trapping.
  2. Risk-Sensitive Cost Function:
    • The U-MPPI strategy incorporates a risk-sensitive cost function that explicitly considers system uncertainties during trajectory evaluation. This function is designed to account for the covariance information provided by UT, effectively balancing performance and safety by adjusting the penalty matrix based on the level of uncertainty. The cost function is effectively integrated into the MPPI framework, enhancing resilience against variability in dynamic environments.

Simulation and Experimental Validation:

The effectiveness of the U-MPPI control strategy has been validated through extensive simulations and real-world demonstrations using autonomous ground vehicle scenarios in cluttered environments. Key performance metrics compared between U-MPPI and traditional MPPI include task completion rates, success rates, and the number of collision-free trajectories generated.

  • Simulation Results:
    • In simulated forest environments with varying obstacle densities, U-MPPI demonstrated superior performance, achieving higher task completion rates and exhibiting reduced instances of local minima trapping compared to MPPI. In denser environments, U-MPPI maintained robustness and safety, illustrating its advantage in complex navigation tasks.
  • Real-World Demonstration:
    • In real-world corridor navigation tasks, U-MPPI showcased effective real-time performance and improved smoothness in robot motion. The comprehensive incorporation of the local costmap into the U-MPPI framework underscores its practicality and adaptability in unpredictable environments, resulting in more accurate localization and fewer collisions.

Implications and Future Directions:

The introduction of U-MPPI represents a significant advancement in trajectory optimization frameworks for autonomous systems. By explicitly incorporating risk considerations and improving state-space exploration with UT, the proposed strategy enhances both theoretical control frameworks and practical applications in safety-critical domains such as autonomous driving.

Future work may explore further integration of advanced risk measures, such as chance constraints, to refine the trade-off between exploration and exploitation in uncertain environments. Additionally, extending the framework to handle dynamic obstacles with real-time adaptability could broaden its applicability in autonomous robotics and navigation systems.

Youtube Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com