D-LGP: Dynamic Logic-Geometric Program for Reactive Task and Motion Planning
Abstract: Many real-world sequential manipulation tasks involve a combination of discrete symbolic search and continuous motion planning, collectively known as combined task and motion planning (TAMP). However, prevailing methods often struggle with the computational burden and intricate combinatorial challenges, limiting their applications for online replanning in the real world. To address this, we propose Dynamic Logic-Geometric Program (D-LGP), a novel approach integrating Dynamic Tree Search and global optimization for efficient hybrid planning. Through empirical evaluation on three benchmarks, we demonstrate the efficacy of our approach, showcasing superior performance in comparison to state-of-the-art techniques. We validate our approach through simulation and demonstrate its reactive capability to cope with online uncertainty and external disturbances in the real world. Project webpage: https://sites.google.com/view/dyn-lgp.
- 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.
- A. Razmjoo, T. S. Lembono, and S. Calinon, “Optimal control combining emulation and imitation to acquire physical assistance skills,” in 2021 20th International Conference on Advanced Robotics (ICAR). IEEE, 2021, pp. 338–343.
- M. Toussaint and M. Lopes, “Multi-bound tree search for logic-geometric programming in cooperative manipulation domains,” in Proc. IEEE Intl Conf. on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2017, pp. 4044–4051.
- 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 Proc. IEEE/RSJ Intl Conf. on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2022, pp. 13 761–13 768.
- M. Toussaint, “Logic-geometric programming: an optimization-based approach to combined task and motion planning,” in Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2015, pp. 1930–1936.
- R. Bellman, “Dynamic programming,” Science, vol. 153, no. 3731, pp. 34–37, 1966.
- S. Cambon, R. Alami, and F. Gravot, “A hybrid approach to intricate motion, manipulation and task planning,” Intl Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 104–126, 2009.
- E. Plaku and G. D. Hager, “Sampling-based motion and symbolic action planning with geometric and differential constraints,” in Proc. IEEE Intl Conf. on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2010, pp. 5002–5008.
- C. R. Garrett, T. Lozano-Pérez, and L. P. Kaelbling, “Pddlstream: Integrating symbolic planners and blackbox samplers via optimistic adaptive planning,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, vol. 30, 2020, pp. 440–448.
- C. R. Garrett, T. Lozano-Perez, and L. P. Kaelbling, “Ffrob: Leveraging symbolic planning for efficient task and motion planning,” Intl Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 104–136, 2018.
- C. Quintero-Pena, Z. Kingston, T. Pan, R. Shome, A. Kyrillidis, and L. E. Kavraki, “Optimal grasps and placements for task and motion planning in clutter,” in Proc. IEEE Intl Conf. on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2023, pp. 3707–3713.
- N. T. Dantam, Z. K. Kingston, S. Chaudhuri, and L. E. Kavraki, “An incremental constraint-based framework for task and motion planning,” Intl Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 37, no. 10, pp. 1134–1151, 2018.
- S. LaValle, “Rapidly-exploring random trees: A new tool for path planning,” Research Report 9811, 1998.
- V. N. Hartmann, O. S. Oguz, D. Driess, M. Toussaint, and A. Menges, “Robust task and motion planning for long-horizon architectural construction planning,” in Proc. IEEE/RSJ Intl Conf. on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2020, pp. 6886–6893.
- J. Ortiz-Haro, E. Karpas, M. Toussaint, and M. Katz, “Conflict-directed diverse planning for logic-geometric programming,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, vol. 32, 2022, pp. 279–287.
- Gurobi Optimization, Inc., “Gurobi optimizer reference manual,” 2014. [Online]. Available: http://www.gurobi.com/
- L. Blackmore, M. Ono, and B. C. Williams, “Chance-constrained optimal path planning with obstacles,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 1080–1094, 2011.
- T. Migimatsu and J. Bohg, “Object-centric task and motion planning in dynamic environments,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters (RA-L), vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 844–851, 2020.
- J. A. Andersson, J. Gillis, G. Horn, J. B. Rawlings, and M. Diehl, “Casadi: a software framework for nonlinear optimization and optimal control,” Mathematical Programming Computation, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1–36, 2019.
- P. Virtanen, R. Gommers, T. E. Oliphant, M. Haberland, T. Reddy, D. Cournapeau, E. Burovski, P. Peterson, W. Weckesser, J. Bright, et al., “Scipy 1.0: fundamental algorithms for scientific computing in python,” Nature methods, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 261–272, 2020.
- R. Deits and R. Tedrake, “Computing large convex regions of obstacle-free space through semidefinite programming,” in Algorithmic Foundations of Robotics XI: Selected Contributions of the Eleventh International Workshop on the Algorithmic Foundations of Robotics. Springer, 2015, pp. 109–124.
Paper Prompts
Sign up for free to create and run prompts on this paper using GPT-5.
Top Community Prompts
Collections
Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.