Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
125 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
47 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Progressive Smoothing for Motion Planning in Real-Time NMPC (2403.01830v1)

Published 4 Mar 2024 in eess.SY, cs.SY, and math.OC

Abstract: Nonlinear model predictive control (NMPC) is a popular strategy for solving motion planning problems, including obstacle avoidance constraints, in autonomous driving applications. Non-smooth obstacle shapes, such as rectangles, introduce additional local minima in the underlying optimization problem. Smooth over-approximations, e.g., ellipsoidal shapes, limit the performance due to their conservativeness. We propose to vary the smoothness and the related over-approximation by a homotopy. Instead of varying the smoothness in consecutive sequential quadratic programming iterations, we use formulations that decrease the smooth over-approximation from the end towards the beginning of the prediction horizon. Thus, the real-time iterations algorithm is applicable to the proposed NMPC formulation. Different formulations are compared in simulation experiments and shown to successfully improve performance indicators without increasing the computation time.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (29)
  1. M. Diehl, H. G. Bock, and J. P. Schlöder, “A real-time iteration scheme for nonlinear optimization in optimal feedback control,” SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization, vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 1714–1736, 2005.
  2. U. Rosolia and F. Borrelli, “Learning model predictive control for iterative tasks. a data-driven control framework,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 63, no. 7, pp. 1883–1896, 2018.
  3. D. Kloeser, T. Schoels, T. Sartor, A. Zanelli, G. Prison, and M. Diehl, “NMPC for racing using a singularity-free path-parametric model with obstacle avoidance,” IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 14 324–14 329, 2020, 21st IFAC World Congress.
  4. J. L. Vázquez, M. Brühlmeier, A. Liniger, A. Rupenyan, and J. Lygeros, “Optimization-based hierarchical motion planning for autonomous racing,” in IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2020, pp. 2397–2403.
  5. X. Xing, B. Zhao, C. Han, D. Ren, and H. Xia, “Vehicle motion planning with joint cartesian-frenet MPC,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 10 738–10 745, 2022.
  6. A. Raji, A. Liniger, A. Giove, A. Toschi, N. Musiu, D. Morra, M. Verucchi, D. Caporale, and M. Bertogna, “Motion planning and control for multi vehicle autonomous racing at high speeds,” in IEEE 25th International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC), 2022, pp. 2775–2782.
  7. R. Reiter, A. Nurkanović, J. Frey, and M. Diehl, “Frenet-cartesian model representations for automotive obstacle avoidance within nonlinear MPC,” European Journal of Control, p. 100847, 2023.
  8. K. Bergman and D. Axehill, “Combining homotopy methods and numerical optimal control to solve motion planning problems,” in IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), 2018, pp. 347–354.
  9. A. Schimpe and F. Diermeyer, “Steer with me: A predictive, potential field-based control approach for semi-autonomous, teleoperated road vehicles,” in IEEE 23rd International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC), 2020, pp. 1–6.
  10. A. Sathya, P. Sopasakis, R. Van Parys, A. Themelis, G. Pipeleers, and P. Patrinos, “Embedded nonlinear model predictive control for obstacle avoidance using PANOC,” in European Control Conference (ECC), 2018, pp. 1523–1528.
  11. M. Geisert and N. Mansard, “Trajectory generation for quadrotor based systems using numerical optimal control,” in IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2016, pp. 2958–2964.
  12. S. H. Nair, E. H. Tseng, and F. Borrelli, “Collision avoidance for dynamic obstacles with uncertain predictions using model predictive control,” in IEEE 61st Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), 2022, pp. 5267–5272.
  13. T. Schoels, P. Rutquist, L. Palmieri, A. Zanelli, K. O. Arras, and M. Diehl, “Ciao*: MPC-based safe motion planning in predictable dynamic environments,” IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 6555–6562, 2020, 21st IFAC World Congress.
  14. Y. Oh, M. H. Lee, and J. Moon, “Infinity-norm-based worst-case collision avoidance control for quadrotors,” IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 101 052–101 064, 2021.
  15. J. Ziegler, P. Bender, T. Dang, and C. Stiller, “Trajectory planning for bertha - a local, continuous method,” in IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium, Proceedings, 06 2014, pp. 450–457.
  16. J. Wang, Y. Yan, K. Zhang, Y. Chen, C. Mingcong, and G. Yin, “Path planning on large curvature roads using driver-vehicle-road system based on the kinematic vehicle model,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. PP, pp. 1–1, 11 2021.
  17. S. Brossette and P.-B. Wieber, “Collision avoidance based on separating planes for feet trajectory generation,” 11 2017, pp. 509–514.
  18. A. Zanelli, “Inexact methods for nonlinear model predictive control: stability, applications, and software,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Freiburg, 2021.
  19. K. Baumgärtner, A. Zanelli, and M. Diehl, “Stability analysis of nonlinear model predictive control with progressive tightening of stage costs and constraints,” IEEE Control Systems Letters, vol. 7, pp. 3018–3023, 2023.
  20. R. Quirynen, S. Safaoui, and S. Di Cairano, “Real-time mixed-integer quadratic programming for vehicle decision making and motion planning,” 2023.
  21. R. Reiter, M. Kirchengast, D. Watzenig, and M. Diehl, “Mixed-integer optimization-based planning for autonomous racing with obstacles and rewards,” IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 54, no. 6, pp. 99–106, 2021, 7th IFAC Conference on Nonlinear Model Predictive Control NMPC 2021.
  22. R. Reiter, J. Hoffmann, J. Boedecker, and M. Diehl, “A hierarchical approach for strategic motion planning in autonomous racing,” in European Control Conference (ECC), 2023, pp. 1–8.
  23. M. Werling, J. Ziegler, S. Kammel, and S. Thrun, “Optimal trajectory generation for dynamic street scenarios in a frenet frame,” in Proceedings - IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 06 2010, pp. 987 – 993.
  24. M. Schuurmans, A. Katriniok, C. Meissen, H. E. Tseng, and P. Patrinos, “Safe, learning-based MPC for highway driving under lane-change uncertainty: A distributionally robust approach,” Artificial Intelligence, vol. 320, p. 103920, 2023.
  25. H. Bock and K. Plitt, “A multiple shooting algorithm for direct solution of optimal control problems*,” IFAC Proceedings Volumes, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 1603–1608, 1984, 9th IFAC World Congress: A Bridge Between Control Science and Technology, Budapest, Hungary, 2-6 July 1984.
  26. Q. Tran Dinh, S. Gumussoy, W. Michiels, and M. Diehl, “Combining convex–concave decompositions and linearization approaches for solving bmis, with application to static output feedback,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 57, no. 6, pp. 1377–1390, 2012.
  27. Ltd. Roborace. 2019. Roborace. [Online]. Available: https://roborace.com/
  28. R. Verschueren, G. Frison, D. Kouzoupis, J. Frey, N. van Duijkeren, A. Zanelli, B. Novoselnik, T. Albin, R. Quirynen, and M. Diehl, “acados – a modular open-source framework for fast embedded optimal control,” Mathematical Programming Computation, Oct 2021.
  29. G. Frison and M. Diehl, “HPIPM: a high-performance quadratic programming framework for model predictive control,” IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 6563–6569, 2020, 21st IFAC World Congress.
Citations (3)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

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

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

Tweets