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

Differentiable Task Assignment and Motion Planning (2304.09734v2)

Published 19 Apr 2023 in cs.RO

Abstract: Task and motion planning is one of the key problems in robotics today. It is often formulated as a discrete task allocation problem combined with continuous motion planning. Many existing approaches to TAMP involve explicit descriptions of task primitives that cause discrete changes in the kinematic relationship between the actor and the objects. In this work we propose an alternative, fully differentiable approach which supports a large number of TAMP problem instances. Rather than explicitly enumerating task primitives, actions are instead represented implicitly as part of the solution to a nonlinear optimization problem. We focus on decision making for robotic manipulators, specifically for pick and place tasks, and explore the efficacy of the model through a number of simulated experiments including multiple robots, objects and interactions with the environment. We also show several possible extensions.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (26)
  1. T. Lozano-Pérez and L. P. Kaelbling, “A constraint-based method for solving sequential manipulation planning problems,” in 2014 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.   IEEE, 2014, pp. 3684–3691.
  2. M. Toussaint, “Logic-geometric programming: An optimization-based approach to combined task and motion planning.” in IJCAI, 2015, pp. 1930–1936.
  3. M. Toussaint and M. Lopes, “Multi-bound tree search for logic-geometric programming in cooperative manipulation domains,” in 2017 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).   IEEE, 2017, pp. 4044–4051.
  4. D. Driess, O. Oguz, and M. Toussaint, “Hierarchical task and motion planning using logic-geometric programming (hlgp),” in RSS Workshop on Robust Task and Motion Planning, 2019.
  5. C. V. Braun, J. Ortiz-Haro, M. Toussaint, and O. S. Oguz, “Rhh-lgp: Receding horizon and heuristics-based logic-geometric programming for task and motion planning,” in 2022 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS).   IEEE, 2022, pp. 13 761–13 768.
  6. W. Thomason and R. A. Knepper, “A unified sampling-based approach to integrated task and motion planning,” in The International Symposium of Robotics Research.   Springer, 2019, pp. 773–788.
  7. C. R. Garrett, T. Lozano-Pérez, and L. P. Kaelbling, “Sampling-based methods for factored task and motion planning,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 37, no. 13-14, pp. 1796–1825, 2018.
  8. C. R. Garrett, R. Chitnis, R. Holladay, B. Kim, T. Silver, L. P. Kaelbling, and T. Lozano-Pérez, “Integrated task and motion planning,” Annual review of control, robotics, and autonomous systems, vol. 4, pp. 265–293, 2021.
  9. F. Lagriffoul, N. T. Dantam, C. Garrett, A. Akbari, S. Srivastava, and L. E. Kavraki, “Platform-independent benchmarks for task and motion planning,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 3765–3772, 2018.
  10. A. Billard and D. Kragic, “Trends and challenges in robot manipulation,” Science, vol. 364, no. 6446, eaat8414, 2019.
  11. K. Kleeberger, R. Bormann, W. Kraus, and M. F. Huber, “A survey on learning-based robotic grasping,” Current Robotics Reports, vol. 1, pp. 239–249, 2020.
  12. M. Suomalainen, Y. Karayiannidis, and V. Kyrki, “A survey of robot manipulation in contact,” Robotics and Autonomous Systems, vol. 156, 104224, 2022.
  13. R. Shome and K. E. Bekris, “Anytime multi-arm task and motion planning for pick-and-place of individual objects via handoffs,” in 2019 International Symposium on Multi-Robot and Multi-Agent Systems (MRS).   IEEE, 2019, pp. 37–43.
  14. H. I. Bozma and M. Kalalıoğlu, “Multirobot coordination in pick-and-place tasks on a moving conveyor,” Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 530–538, 2012.
  15. I. Mordatch, E. Todorov, and Z. Popović, “Discovery of complex behaviors through contact-invariant optimization,” ACM Transactions on Graphics (ToG), vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 1–8, 2012.
  16. I. Mordatch, Z. Popović, and E. Todorov, “Contact-invariant optimization for hand manipulation,” in Proceedings of the ACM SIGGRAPH/Eurographics symposium on computer animation, 2012, pp. 137–144.
  17. M. Posa, C. Cantu, and R. Tedrake, “A direct method for trajectory optimization of rigid bodies through contact,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 69–81, 2014.
  18. K. Hauser and J.-C. Latombe, “Multi-modal motion planning in non-expansive spaces,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 897–915, 2010.
  19. L. E. Kavraki, P. Svestka, J.-C. Latombe, and M. H. Overmars, “Probabilistic roadmaps for path planning in high-dimensional configuration spaces,” IEEE transactions on Robotics and Automation, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 566–580, 1996.
  20. R. Takano, H. Oyama, and M. Yamakita, “Continuous optimization-based task and motion planning with signal temporal logic specifications for sequential manipulation,” in 2021 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).   IEEE, 2021, pp. 8409–8415.
  21. Y. V. Pant, H. Abbas, and R. Mangharam, “Smooth operator: Control using the smooth robustness of temporal logic,” in 2017 IEEE Conference on Control Technology and Applications (CCTA).   IEEE, 2017, pp. 1235–1240.
  22. M. P. Bendsøe, “Optimal shape design as a material distribution problem,” Structural optimization, vol. 1, pp. 193–202, 1989.
  23. G. I. Rozvany, “Aims, scope, methods, history and unified terminology of computer-aided topology optimization in structural mechanics,” Structural and Multidisciplinary optimization, vol. 21, pp. 90–108, 2001.
  24. S. Zimmermann, G. Hakimifard, M. Zamora, R. Poranne, and S. Coros, “A multi-level optimization framework for simultaneous grasping and motion planning,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 2966–2972, 2020.
  25. S. Zimmermann, M. Busenhart, S. Huber, R. Poranne, and S. Coros, “Differentiable collision avoidance using collision primitives,” in 2022 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS).   IEEE, 2022, pp. 8086–8093.
  26. Y. Chen, T. A. Davis, W. W. Hager, and S. Rajamanickam, “Algorithm 887: Cholmod, supernodal sparse cholesky factorization and update/downdate,” ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software (TOMS), vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 1–14, 2008.
Citations (4)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

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

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