Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
144 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

Kinematic Modularity of Elementary Dynamic Actions (2309.15271v2)

Published 26 Sep 2023 in cs.RO

Abstract: In this paper, a kinematically modular approach to robot control is presented. The method involves structures called Elementary Dynamic Actions and a network model combining these elements. With this control framework, a rich repertoire of movements can be generated by combination of basic modules. The problems of solving inverse kinematics, managing kinematic singularity and kinematic redundancy are avoided. The modular approach is robust against contact and physical interaction, which makes it particularly effective for contact-rich manipulation. Each kinematic module can be learned by Imitation Learning, thereby resulting in a modular learning strategy for robot control. The theoretical foundations and their real robot implementation are presented. Using a KUKA LBR iiwa14 robot, three tasks were considered: (1) generating a sequence of discrete movements, (2) generating a combination of discrete and rhythmic movements, and (3) a drawing and erasing task. The results obtained indicate that this modular approach has the potential to simplify the generation of a diverse range of robot actions.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (38)
  1. S. Schaal, “Is imitation learning the route to humanoid robots?” Trends in cognitive sciences, vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 233–242, 1999.
  2. A. J. Ijspeert, J. Nakanishi, and S. Schaal, “Movement imitation with nonlinear dynamical systems in humanoid robots,” in Proceedings 2002 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Cat. No. 02CH37292), vol. 2.   IEEE, 2002, pp. 1398–1403.
  3. S. Calinon and A. Billard, “Active teaching in robot programming by demonstration,” in RO-MAN 2007-The 16th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication.   IEEE, 2007, pp. 702–707.
  4. A. J. Ijspeert, J. Nakanishi, H. Hoffmann, P. Pastor, and S. Schaal, “Dynamical movement primitives: learning attractor models for motor behaviors,” Neural computation, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 328–373, 2013.
  5. B. Fang, S. Jia, D. Guo, M. Xu, S. Wen, and F. Sun, “Survey of imitation learning for robotic manipulation,” International Journal of Intelligent Robotics and Applications, vol. 3, pp. 362–369, 2019.
  6. N. Hogan and D. Sternad, “Dynamic primitives of motor behavior,” Biological cybernetics, vol. 106, no. 11, pp. 727–739, 2012.
  7. ——, “Dynamic primitives in the control of locomotion,” Frontiers in computational neuroscience, vol. 7, p. 71, 2013.
  8. N. Hogan, “Physical interaction via dynamic primitives,” in Geometric and numerical foundations of movements.   Springer, 2017, pp. 269–299.
  9. N. Hogan and S. P. Buerger, “Impedance and interaction control,” in Robotics and automation handbook.   CRC press, 2018, pp. 375–398.
  10. M. Saveriano, F. J. Abu-Dakka, A. Kramberger, and L. Peternel, “Dynamic movement primitives in robotics: A tutorial survey,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 42, no. 13, pp. 1133–1184, 2023.
  11. N. A. Bernstein, “The problem of interrelation between coordination and localization.” Arch Biol Sci, vol. 38, pp. 1–35, 1935.
  12. P. Morasso, “Spatial control of arm movements,” Experimental brain research, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 223–227, 1981.
  13. T. Flash and B. Hochner, “Motor primitives in vertebrates and invertebrates,” Current opinion in neurobiology, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 660–666, 2005.
  14. E. Bizzi and F. A. Mussa-Ivaldi, “The acquisition of motor behavior,” in The brain.   Routledge, 2017, pp. 217–232.
  15. A. d’Avella, “Modularity for motor control and motor learning,” Progress in Motor Control: Theories and Translations, pp. 3–19, 2016.
  16. S. Schaal, “Dynamic movement primitives-a framework for motor control in humans and humanoid robotics,” in Adaptive motion of animals and machines.   Springer, 2006, pp. 261–280.
  17. N. Hogan, “Contact and physical interaction,” Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems, vol. 5, pp. 179–203, 2022.
  18. ——, “Impedance control-an approach to manipulation. i-theory. ii-implementation. iii-applications,” ASME Journal of Dynamic Systems and Measurement Control B, vol. 107, pp. 1–24, 1985.
  19. J. Lachner, “A geometric approach to robotic manipulation in physical human-robot interaction,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Twente, 2022.
  20. S. R. Buss and J.-S. Kim, “Selectively damped least squares for inverse kinematics,” Journal of Graphics tools, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 37–49, 2005.
  21. Y. Nakamura and H. Hanafusa, “Inverse kinematic solutions with singularity robustness for robot manipulator control,” Journal of dynamic systems, measurement, and control, vol. 108, no. 3, pp. 163–171, 1986.
  22. N. Hogan and D. Sternad, “On rhythmic and discrete movements: reflections, definitions and implications for motor control,” Experimental brain research, vol. 181, no. 1, pp. 13–30, 2007.
  23. J. R. Andrews and N. Hogan, “Impedance control as a framework for implementing obstacle avoidance in a manipulator,” Master’s thesis, M. I. T., Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, 1983.
  24. W. S. Newman, “High-speed robot control in complex environments,” Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1987.
  25. J. Hermus, J. Lachner, D. Verdi, and N. Hogan, “Exploiting redundancy to facilitate physical interaction,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 599–615, 2021.
  26. S. Hjorth, J. Lachner, S. Stramigioli, O. Madsen, and D. Chrysostomou, “An energy-based approach for the integration of collaborative redundant robots in restricted work environments,” in 2020 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS).   IEEE, 2020, pp. 7152–7158.
  27. J. Kober, J. A. Bagnell, and J. Peters, “Reinforcement learning in robotics: A survey,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 32, no. 11, pp. 1238–1274, 2013.
  28. C. G. Atkeson, A. W. Moore, and S. Schaal, “Locally weighted learning,” Lazy learning, pp. 11–73, 1997.
  29. R. M. Murray, S. S. Sastry, and L. Zexiang, “A mathematical introduction to robotic manipulation,” 1994.
  30. J. Jeong, H. Mishra, C. Ott, and M. J. Kim, “A memory-based so (3) parameterization: Theory and application to 6d impedance control with radially unbounded potential function,” in 2022 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).   IEEE, 2022, pp. 8338–8344.
  31. M. Takegaki, “A new feedback method for dynamic control of manipulators,” Trans. ASME, Ser. G, J. Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control, vol. 103, no. 2, pp. 119–125, 1981.
  32. S. Arimoto, M. Sekimoto, H. Hashiguchi, and R. Ozawa, “Natural resolution of ill-posedness of inverse kinematics for redundant robots: A challenge to bernstein’s degrees-of-freedom problem,” Advanced Robotics, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 401–434, 2005.
  33. N. Hogan and T. Flash, “Moving gracefully: quantitative theories of motor coordination,” Trends in neurosciences, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 170–174, 1987.
  34. B. Nemec and A. Ude, “Action sequencing using dynamic movement primitives,” Robotica, vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 837–846, 2012.
  35. S. Degallier, C. P. Santos, L. Righetti, and A. Ijspeert, “Movement generation using dynamical systems: a humanoid robot performing a drumming task,” in 2006 6th IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots.   IEEE, 2006, pp. 512–517.
  36. S. Degallier, L. Righetti, and A. Ijspeert, “Hand placement during quadruped locomotion in a humanoid robot: A dynamical system approach,” in 2007 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.   IEEE, 2007, pp. 2047–2052.
  37. S. Degallier, L. Righetti, L. Natale, F. Nori, G. Metta, and A. Ijspeert, “A modular bio-inspired architecture for movement generation for the infant-like robot icub,” in 2008 2nd IEEE RAS & EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics.   IEEE, 2008, pp. 795–800.
  38. J. Buchli, F. Stulp, E. Theodorou, and S. Schaal, “Learning variable impedance control,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 30, no. 7, pp. 820–833, 2011.
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