Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
125 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
53 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
42 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

Physics-data hybrid dynamic model of a multi-axis manipulator for sensorless dexterous manipulation and high-performance motion planning (2405.04503v1)

Published 7 May 2024 in cs.RO

Abstract: We report on the development of an implementable physics-data hybrid dynamic model for an articulated manipulator to plan and operate in various scenarios. Meanwhile, the physics-based and data-driven dynamic models are studied in this research to select the best model for planning. The physics-based model is constructed using the Lagrangian method, and the loss terms include inertia loss, viscous loss, and friction loss. As for the data-driven model, three methods are explored, including DNN, LSTM, and XGBoost. Our modeling results demonstrate that, after comprehensive hyperparameter optimization, the XGBoost architecture outperforms DNN and LSTM in accurately representing manipulator dynamics. The hybrid model with physics-based and data-driven terms has the best performance among all models based on the RMSE criteria, and it only needs about 24k of training data. In addition, we developed a virtual force sensor of a manipulator using the observed external torque derived from the dynamic model and designed a motion planner through the physics-data hybrid dynamic model. The external torque contributes to forces and torque on the end effector, facilitating interaction with the surroundings, while the internal torque governs manipulator motion dynamics and compensates for internal losses. By estimating external torque via the difference between measured joint torque and internal losses, we implement a sensorless control strategy which is demonstrated through a peg-in-hole task. Lastly, a learning-based motion planner based on the hybrid dynamic model assists in planning time-efficient trajectories for the manipulator. This comprehensive approach underscores the efficacy of integrating physics-based and data-driven models for advanced manipulator control and planning in industrial environments.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (53)
  1. “An integrated curvature surface inspection and prediction system for 5-axis synchronization machining,” The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 115(11), pp. 3873–3886.
  2. “Development of an intelligent grinding system for fabricating aspheric glass lenses,” The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 111, pp. 1351–1359.
  3. “Real-time surface roughness estimation and automatic regrinding of ground workpieces using a data-driven model and grinding force inputs,” The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 132(1), pp. 925–941.
  4. “Robot arm grasping using learning-based template matching and self-rotation learning network,” The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 121(3), pp. 1915–1926.
  5. “Recent developments in computer vision and artificial intelligence aided intelligent robotic welding applications,” The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 126(11), pp. 4763–4809.
  6. “Manipulator trajectory optimization using reinforcement learning on a reduced-order dynamic model with deep neural network compensation,” Machines, 11(3), p. 350.
  7. Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach 3rd ed.
  8. Copeland, M. What’s the difference between artificial intelligence, machine learning and deep learning? https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/whats-difference-artificial-intelligence-machine-learning-deep-learning-ai/ Accessed: 2020-07-16.
  9. “On the complexity of neural network classifiers: A comparison between shallow and deep architectures,” IEEE transactions on neural networks and learning systems, 25(8), pp. 1553–1565.
  10. Learning to diagnose with lstm recurrent neural networks https://arxiv.org/pdf/1511.03677.pdf Accessed: 2020-07-16.
  11. “Lightgbm: A highly efficient gradient boosting decision tree,” Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, pp. 3146–3154.
  12. “Learning nonlinear dynamic models of soft robots for model predictive control with neural networks,” In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Soft Robotics (RoboSoft), IEEE, pp. 39 – 45.
  13. “Neural network modeling of a flexible manipulator robot,” In Computer Information Systems and Industrial Management: 11th IFIP TC 8 International Conference (CISIM), pp. 395 – 4045.
  14. “Fuzzy adaptive inverse compensation method to tracking control of uncertain nonlinear systems with generalized actuator dead zone,” IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 25(1), pp. 191–204.
  15. “Stock price prediction using lstm, rnn and cnn-sliding window model,” In International conference on advances in computing, communications and informatics (ICACCI), IEEE, pp. 1643–1647.
  16. “Xgboost: A scalable tree boosting system,” In ACM SigKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, pp. 785–794.
  17. “Application of neural networks for vehicle classifiers: Extreme learning machine approach,” In International Conference on Electrical Engineering/Electronics, Computer, Telecommunications and Information Technology (ECTI-CON), pp. 241–244.
  18. “Deep learning approaches for improving robustness in real-time 3d-object positioning and manipulation in severe lighting conditions,” The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 192(9), pp. 3829–3847.
  19. “Predicting composite laminates roughness: Data-driven modeling approaches using force sensor data from robotic manipulators,” The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 128(3-4), pp. 1801–1813.
  20. “Survey on human-robot interaction for robot programming in industrial applications,” IFAC-PapersOnline, 51(11), pp. 66–71.
  21. “Collaborative robots and industrial revolution 4.0 (ir 4.0),” In International Conference on Emerging Trends in Smart Technologies (ICETST), pp. 1–5.
  22. “Development of an intelligent transformer insertion system using a robot arm,” Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 51, pp. 209–221.
  23. “Hole detection algorithm for square peg-in-hole using force-based shape recognition,” In IEEE International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE), pp. 1074–1079.
  24. “Autonomous alignment of peg and hole by force/torque measurement for robotic assembly,” In IEEE International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE), pp. 162–167.
  25. “Multi-sensor perception strategy to enhance autonomy of robotic operation for uncertain peg-in-hole task,” Sensors, 21(11), p. 3818.
  26. “Variable compliance control for robotic peg-in-hole assembly: A deep-reinforcement-learning approach,” Applied Sciences, 10(19), p. 6923.
  27. “Compliance-based robotic peg-in-hole assembly strategy without force feedback,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 64(8), pp. 6299–6309.
  28. “Development of a virtual force sensor for a low-cost collaborative robot and applications to safety control,” Sensors, 19(11), p. 2603.
  29. “A virtual sensor for collision detection and distinction with conventional industrial robots,” Sensors, 19(1), p. 2368.
  30. “Virtual torque sensor for low-cost rc servo motors based on dynamic system identification utilizing parametric constraints,” Sensors, 18(11), pp. 455–470.
  31. Introduction to Robotics: Mechanics and Control 3rd ed.
  32. “An effective robot trajectory planning method using a genetic algorithm,” Mechatronics, 14(5), p. 3856.
  33. “Optimization of robotic arm trajectory using genetic algorithm,” Mechatronics, 47(3), pp. 1748–1753.
  34. “Reinforcement learning in robotics: A survey,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, 32(11), pp. 1238–1274.
  35. Proximal policy optimization algorithms https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.06347 Accessed: 2020-07-16.
  36. Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction 2nd ed.
  37. “Hybrid analytical and data-driven modeling for feed-forward robot control,” Sensors, 17(2), p. 311.
  38. “Data-driven model predictive control for trajectory tracking with a robotic arm,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 4(4), pp. 3758–3765.
  39. “Data-driven dynamic modeling for a swimming robotic fish,” IEEE Transactions on industrial electronics, 63(9), pp. 5632–5640.
  40. “Data-driven dynamics modeling and control strategy for a planar n-dof cable-driven parallel robot driven by n+ 1 cables allowing collisions,” Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics, 16(5).
  41. Keras https://keras.io/ Accessed: 2020-07-16.
  42. Xgboost https://xgboost.readthedocs.io/en/latest/gpu/ Accessed: 2020-07-16.
  43. Hyperparameter search in machine learning https://arxiv.org/abs/1502.02127 Accessed: 2020-07-16.
  44. “Practical bayesian optimization of machine learning algorithms,” Advances in neural information processing systems, 25.
  45. “Random search for hyper-parameter optimization,” Journal of machine learning research, 13(2).
  46. “An experimental comparison of bayesian optimization for bipedal locomotion,” In IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA), IEEE, pp. 1951–1958.
  47. scikit-learn https://scikit-learn.org/ Accessed: 2020-07-16.
  48. “A new data source for inverse dynamics learning,” In IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), IEEE, pp. 4723–4730.
  49. “Obbtree: a hierarchical structure for rapid interference detection,” In Proceedings of the 23rd annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, pp. 171–180.
  50. Huynh, J. Separating axis theorem for oriented bounding boxes 2009.
  51. “Kalman filter and its application,” In 8th international conference on intelligent networks and intelligent systems (ICINIS), pp. 74–77.
  52. “Force tracking impedance control with variable target stiffness,” IFAC Proceedings, 41(2), pp. 6751–6756.
  53. “An adaptive framework for robotic polishing based on impedance control,” The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 112, pp. 401–417.

Summary

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

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com