Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Mixed Strategy Nash Equilibrium for Crowd Navigation

Published 3 Mar 2024 in cs.RO, cs.GT, and cs.LG | (2403.01537v6)

Abstract: Robots navigating in crowded areas should negotiate free space with humans rather than fully controlling collision avoidance, as this can lead to freezing behavior. Game theory provides a framework for the robot to reason about potential cooperation from humans for collision avoidance during path planning. In particular, the mixed strategy Nash equilibrium captures the negotiation behavior under uncertainty, making it well suited for crowd navigation. However, computing the mixed strategy Nash equilibrium is often prohibitively expensive for real-time decision-making. In this paper, we propose an iterative Bayesian update scheme over probability distributions of trajectories. The algorithm simultaneously generates a stochastic plan for the robot and probabilistic predictions of other pedestrians' paths. We prove that the proposed algorithm is equivalent to solving a mixed strategy game for crowd navigation, and the algorithm guarantees the recovery of the global Nash equilibrium of the game. We name our algorithm Bayesian Recursive Nash Equilibrium (BRNE) and develop a real-time model prediction crowd navigation framework. Since BRNE is not solving a general-purpose mixed strategy Nash equilibrium but a tailored formula specifically for crowd navigation, it can compute the solution in real-time on a low-power embedded computer. We evaluate BRNE in both simulated environments and real-world pedestrian datasets. BRNE consistently outperforms non-learning and learning-based methods regarding safety and navigation efficiency. It also reaches human-level crowd navigation performance in the pedestrian dataset benchmark. Lastly, we demonstrate the practicality of our algorithm with real humans on an untethered quadruped robot with fully onboard perception and computation.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (74)
  1. H. Bai, S. Cai, N. Ye, D. Hsu, and W. S. Lee, “Intention-aware online POMDP planning for autonomous driving in a crowd,” in 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), May 2015, pp. 454–460, iSSN: 1050-4729.
  2. S. Singh, E. D. Olson, and C.-H. K. Tsai, “Use of service robots in an event setting: Understanding the role of social presence, eeriness, and identity threat,” Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, vol. 49, pp. 528–537, Dec. 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S144767702100187X
  3. S. Bansal, J. Xu, A. Howard, and C. Isbell, “Bayes–Nash: Bayesian inference for Nash equilibrium selection in human-robot parallel play,” Autonomous Robots, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 217–230, Jan. 2022. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10514-021-10023-8
  4. H. Murakami, C. Feliciani, Y. Nishiyama, and K. Nishinari, “Mutual anticipation can contribute to self-organization in human crowds,” Science Advances, vol. 7, no. 12, p. eabe7758, Mar. 2021, publisher: American Association for the Advancement of Science. [Online]. Available: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abe7758
  5. K. A. Bacik, B. S. Bacik, and T. Rogers, “Lane nucleation in complex active flows,” Science, vol. 379, no. 6635, pp. 923–928, Mar. 2023, publisher: American Association for the Advancement of Science. [Online]. Available: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.add8091
  6. P. Trautman, J. Ma, R. M. Murray, and A. Krause, “Robot navigation in dense human crowds: Statistical models and experimental studies of human–robot cooperation,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 335–356, Mar. 2015, publisher: SAGE Publications Ltd STM. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1177/0278364914557874
  7. D. Helbing and P. Molnár, “Social force model for pedestrian dynamics,” Physical Review E, vol. 51, no. 5, pp. 4282–4286, May 1995, publisher: American Physical Society. [Online]. Available: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevE.51.4282
  8. J. van den Berg, S. J. Guy, M. Lin, and D. Manocha, “Reciprocal n-Body Collision Avoidance,” in Robotics Research, ser. Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics, C. Pradalier, R. Siegwart, and G. Hirzinger, Eds.   Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2011, pp. 3–19.
  9. D. Sadigh, N. Landolfi, S. S. Sastry, S. A. Seshia, and A. D. Dragan, “Planning for cars that coordinate with people: leveraging effects on human actions for planning and active information gathering over human internal state,” Autonomous Robots, vol. 42, no. 7, pp. 1405–1426, Oct. 2018. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10514-018-9746-1
  10. J. F. Nash, “Equilibrium points in n-person games,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 48–49, Jan. 1950, publisher: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. [Online]. Available: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.36.1.48
  11. J. Nash, “Non-Cooperative Games,” Annals of Mathematics, vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 286–295, 1951, publisher: Annals of Mathematics. [Online]. Available: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1969529
  12. C. Daskalakis, P. W. Goldberg, and C. H. Papadimitriou, “The complexity of computing a Nash equilibrium,” Communications of the ACM, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 89–97, Feb. 2009. [Online]. Available: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1461928.1461951
  13. W. Burgard, A. B. Cremers, D. Fox, D. Hähnel, G. Lakemeyer, D. Schulz, W. Steiner, and S. Thrun, “The interactive museum tour-guide robot,” in Proceedings of the fifteenth national/tenth conference on Artificial intelligence/Innovative applications of artificial intelligence, ser. AAAI ’98/IAAI ’98.   USA: American Association for Artificial Intelligence, Jul. 1998, pp. 11–18.
  14. S. Thrun, M. Beetz, M. Bennewitz, W. Burgard, A. B. Cremers, F. Dellaert, D. Fox, D. Hähnel, C. Rosenberg, N. Roy, J. Schulte, and D. Schulz, “Probabilistic Algorithms and the Interactive Museum Tour-Guide Robot Minerva,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 19, no. 11, pp. 972–999, Nov. 2000, publisher: SAGE Publications Ltd STM. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1177/02783640022067922
  15. R. Siegwart, K. O. Arras, S. Bouabdallah, D. Burnier, G. Froidevaux, X. Greppin, B. Jensen, A. Lorotte, L. Mayor, M. Meisser, R. Philippsen, R. Piguet, G. Ramel, G. Terrien, and N. Tomatis, “Robox at Expo.02: A large-scale installation of personal robots,” Robotics and Autonomous Systems, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 203–222, Mar. 2003. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921889002003767
  16. I. Nourbakhsh, C. Kunz, and T. Willeke, “The mobot museum robot installations: a five year experiment,” in Proceedings 2003 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2003) (Cat. No.03CH37453), vol. 4, Oct. 2003, pp. 3636–3641 vol.3.
  17. A. Clodic, S. Fleury, R. Alami, R. Chatila, G. Bailly, L. Brethes, M. Cottret, P. Danes, X. Dollat, F. Elisei, I. Ferrane, M. Herrb, G. Infantes, C. Lemaire, F. Lerasle, J. Manhes, P. Marcoul, P. Menezes, and V. Montreuil, “Rackham: An Interactive Robot-Guide,” in ROMAN 2006 - The 15th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Sep. 2006, pp. 502–509, iSSN: 1944-9437.
  18. A. Chella and I. Macaluso, “The perception loop in CiceRobot, a museum guide robot,” Neurocomputing, vol. 72, no. 4, pp. 760–766, Jan. 2009. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925231208004657
  19. C. Mavrogiannis, F. Baldini, A. Wang, D. Zhao, P. Trautman, A. Steinfeld, and J. Oh, “Core Challenges of Social Robot Navigation: A Survey,” ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction, Feb. 2023, just Accepted. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3583741
  20. D. Fox, W. Burgard, and S. Thrun, “The dynamic window approach to collision avoidance,” IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 23–33, Mar. 1997, conference Name: IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine.
  21. B. D. Ziebart, N. Ratliff, G. Gallagher, C. Mertz, K. Peterson, J. A. Bagnell, M. Hebert, A. K. Dey, and S. Srinivasa, “Planning-based prediction for pedestrians,” in 2009 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.   St. Louis, MO, USA: IEEE, Oct. 2009, pp. 3931–3936. [Online]. Available: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5354147/
  22. M. Luber, L. Spinello, J. Silva, and K. O. Arras, “Socially-aware robot navigation: A learning approach,” in 2012 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Oct. 2012, pp. 902–907, iSSN: 2153-0866.
  23. P. Henry, C. Vollmer, B. Ferris, and D. Fox, “Learning to navigate through crowded environments,” in 2010 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, May 2010, pp. 981–986, iSSN: 1050-4729.
  24. A. Alahi, K. Goel, V. Ramanathan, A. Robicquet, L. Fei-Fei, and S. Savarese, “Social LSTM: Human Trajectory Prediction in Crowded Spaces,” 2016, pp. 961–971. [Online]. Available: https://openaccess.thecvf.com/content_cvpr_2016/html/Alahi_Social_LSTM_Human_CVPR_2016_paper.html
  25. A. Gupta, J. Johnson, L. Fei-Fei, S. Savarese, and A. Alahi, “Social GAN: Socially Acceptable Trajectories With Generative Adversarial Networks,” 2018, pp. 2255–2264. [Online]. Available: https://openaccess.thecvf.com/content_cvpr_2018/html/Gupta_Social_GAN_Socially_CVPR_2018_paper.html
  26. T. Salzmann, B. Ivanovic, P. Chakravarty, and M. Pavone, “Trajectron++: Dynamically-Feasible Trajectory Forecasting with Heterogeneous Data,” in Computer Vision – ECCV 2020, ser. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, A. Vedaldi, H. Bischof, T. Brox, and J.-M. Frahm, Eds.   Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2020, pp. 683–700.
  27. A. Rudenko, L. Palmieri, M. Herman, K. M. Kitani, D. M. Gavrila, and K. O. Arras, “Human motion trajectory prediction: a survey,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 39, no. 8, pp. 895–935, Jul. 2020, publisher: SAGE Publications Ltd STM. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1177/0278364920917446
  28. C. Schöller, V. Aravantinos, F. Lay, and A. Knoll, “What the Constant Velocity Model Can Teach Us About Pedestrian Motion Prediction,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 1696–1703, Apr. 2020, conference Name: IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters.
  29. L. Huber, J.-J. Slotine, and A. Billard, “Avoiding Dense and Dynamic Obstacles in Enclosed Spaces: Application to Moving in Crowds,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 3113–3132, Oct. 2022, conference Name: IEEE Transactions on Robotics.
  30. C. Cao, P. Trautman, and S. Iba, “Dynamic Channel: A Planning Framework for Crowd Navigation,” in 2019 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), May 2019, pp. 5551–5557, iSSN: 2577-087X.
  31. N. E. Du Toit and J. W. Burdick, “Robot Motion Planning in Dynamic, Uncertain Environments,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 101–115, Feb. 2012, conference Name: IEEE Transactions on Robotics.
  32. D. Fridovich-Keil, A. Bajcsy, J. F. Fisac, S. L. Herbert, S. Wang, A. D. Dragan, and C. J. Tomlin, “Confidence-aware motion prediction for real-time collision avoidance1,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 39, no. 2-3, pp. 250–265, Mar. 2020, publisher: SAGE Publications Ltd STM. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1177/0278364919859436
  33. H. Nishimura, B. Ivanovic, A. Gaidon, M. Pavone, and M. Schwager, “Risk-Sensitive Sequential Action Control with Multi-Modal Human Trajectory Forecasting for Safe Crowd-Robot Interaction,” in 2020 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Oct. 2020, pp. 11 205–11 212, iSSN: 2153-0866.
  34. H. Nishimura and M. Schwager, “SACBP: Belief Space Planning for Continuous-Time Dynamical Systems via Stochastic Sequential Action Control,” arXiv:2002.11775 [cs, eess, math], Sep. 2020, arXiv: 2002.11775. [Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/2002.11775
  35. H. Nishimura, J. Mercat, B. Wulfe, R. T. McAllister, and A. Gaidon, “RAP: Risk-Aware Prediction for Robust Planning,” Nov. 2022. [Online]. Available: https://openreview.net/forum?id=z_hPo2Fu9A3
  36. F. Feurtey, “Simulating the Collision Avoidance Behavior of Pedestrians,” Master’s thesis, University of Tokyo, 2000. [Online]. Available: https://svn.sable.mcgill.ca/sable/courses/COMP763/oldpapers/collision-00-feurtey.pdf
  37. P. Trautman and A. Krause, “Unfreezing the robot: Navigation in dense, interacting crowds,” in 2010 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Oct. 2010, pp. 797–803, iSSN: 2153-0866.
  38. P. Trautman, “Sparse interacting Gaussian processes: Efficiency and optimality theorems of autonomous crowd navigation,” in 2017 IEEE 56th Annual Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), Dec. 2017, pp. 327–334.
  39. P. Trautman and K. Patel, “Real Time Crowd Navigation from First Principles of Probability Theory,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, vol. 30, pp. 459–467, Jun. 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.aaai.org/ojs/index.php/ICAPS/article/view/6741
  40. M. Sun, F. Baldini, P. Trautman, and T. Murphey, “Move Beyond Trajectories: Distribution Space Coupling for Crowd Navigation,” in Proceedings of Robotics: Science and Systems, vol. 17, Jul. 2021. [Online]. Available: http://www.roboticsproceedings.org/rss17/p053.html
  41. C. I. Mavrogiannis, V. Blukis, and R. A. Knepper, “Socially competent navigation planning by deep learning of multi-agent path topologies,” in 2017 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Sep. 2017, pp. 6817–6824, iSSN: 2153-0866.
  42. C. I. Mavrogiannis and R. A. Knepper, “Multi-agent path topology in support of socially competent navigation planning,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 38, no. 2-3, pp. 338–356, Mar. 2019, publisher: SAGE Publications Ltd STM. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1177/0278364918781016
  43. C. I. Mavrogiannis, W. B. Thomason, and R. A. Knepper, “Social Momentum: A Framework for Legible Navigation in Dynamic Multi-Agent Environments,” in Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, ser. HRI ’18.   New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, Feb. 2018, pp. 361–369. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3171221.3171255
  44. C. Mavrogiannis and R. A. Knepper, “Hamiltonian coordination primitives for decentralized multiagent navigation,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 40, no. 10-11, pp. 1234–1254, Sep. 2021, publisher: SAGE Publications Ltd STM. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1177/02783649211037731
  45. C. Mavrogiannis, K. Balasubramanian, S. Poddar, A. Gandra, and S. S. Srinivasa, “Winding Through: Crowd Navigation via Topological Invariance,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 121–128, Jan. 2023, conference Name: IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters.
  46. A. Bizyaeva, A. Franci, and N. E. Leonard, “Nonlinear Opinion Dynamics With Tunable Sensitivity,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 68, no. 3, pp. 1415–1430, Mar. 2023, conference Name: IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.
  47. C. Cathcart, M. Santos, S. Park, and N. E. Leonard, “Opinion-Driven Robot Navigation: Human-Robot Corridor Passing,” Oct. 2022, arXiv:2210.01642 [cs]. [Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/2210.01642
  48. B. Kim and J. Pineau, “Maximum Mean Discrepancy Imitation Learning,” in Robotics: Science and Systems IX.   Robotics: Science and Systems Foundation, Jun. 2013. [Online]. Available: http://www.roboticsproceedings.org/rss09/p38.pdf
  49. ——, “Socially Adaptive Path Planning in Human Environments Using Inverse Reinforcement Learning,” International Journal of Social Robotics, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 51–66, Jan. 2016. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-015-0310-2
  50. H. Kretzschmar, M. Spies, C. Sprunk, and W. Burgard, “Socially compliant mobile robot navigation via inverse reinforcement learning,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 35, no. 11, pp. 1289–1307, Sep. 2016, publisher: SAGE Publications Ltd STM. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1177/0278364915619772
  51. Y. F. Chen, M. Everett, M. Liu, and J. P. How, “Socially aware motion planning with deep reinforcement learning,” in 2017 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Sep. 2017, pp. 1343–1350, iSSN: 2153-0866.
  52. C. Chen, Y. Liu, S. Kreiss, and A. Alahi, “Crowd-Robot Interaction: Crowd-Aware Robot Navigation With Attention-Based Deep Reinforcement Learning,” in 2019 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), May 2019, pp. 6015–6022, iSSN: 2577-087X.
  53. J. Liang, U. Patel, A. J. Sathyamoorthy, and D. Manocha, “Crowd-Steer: Realtime Smooth and Collision-Free Robot Navigation in Densely Crowded Scenarios Trained using High-Fidelity Simulation,” vol. 4, Jul. 2020, pp. 4221–4228, iSSN: 1045-0823. [Online]. Available: https://www.ijcai.org/proceedings/2020/583
  54. Y. Liu, Q. Yan, and A. Alahi, “Social NCE: Contrastive Learning of Socially-aware Motion Representations,” in 2021 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), Oct. 2021, pp. 15 098–15 109, iSSN: 2380-7504.
  55. A. Wang, C. Mavrogiannis, and A. Steinfeld, “Group-based Motion Prediction for Navigation in Crowded Environments,” in Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Robot Learning.   PMLR, Jan. 2022, pp. 871–882, iSSN: 2640-3498. [Online]. Available: https://proceedings.mlr.press/v164/wang22e.html
  56. A. J. Sathyamoorthy, U. Patel, M. Paul, N. K. S. Kumar, Y. Savle, and D. Manocha, “CoMet: Modeling Group Cohesion for Socially Compliant Robot Navigation in Crowded Scenes,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 1008–1015, Apr. 2022, conference Name: IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters.
  57. A. J. Sathyamoorthy, U. Patel, T. Guan, and D. Manocha, “Frozone: Freezing-Free, Pedestrian-Friendly Navigation in Human Crowds,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 4352–4359, Jul. 2020, conference Name: IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters.
  58. D. Fridovich-Keil, E. Ratner, L. Peters, A. D. Dragan, and C. J. Tomlin, “Efficient Iterative Linear-Quadratic Approximations for Nonlinear Multi-Player General-Sum Differential Games,” in 2020 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), May 2020, pp. 1475–1481, iSSN: 2577-087X.
  59. S. Le Cleac’h, M. Schwager, and Z. Manchester, “ALGAMES: a fast augmented Lagrangian solver for constrained dynamic games,” Autonomous Robots, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 201–215, Jan. 2022. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10514-021-10024-7
  60. N. Mehr, M. Wang, M. Bhatt, and M. Schwager, “Maximum-Entropy Multi-Agent Dynamic Games: Forward and Inverse Solutions,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, pp. 1–15, 2023, conference Name: IEEE Transactions on Robotics.
  61. O. So, P. Drews, T. Balch, V. Dimitrov, G. Rosman, and E. A. Theodorou, “MPOGames: Efficient Multimodal Partially Observable Dynamic Games,” Oct. 2022, arXiv:2210.10814 [cs, math]. [Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/2210.10814
  62. O. So, K. Stachowicz, and E. A. Theodorou, “Multimodal Maximum Entropy Dynamic Games,” Feb. 2022, arXiv:2201.12925 [cs, math]. [Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/2201.12925
  63. L. Peters, D. Fridovich-Keil, L. Ferranti, C. Stachniss, J. Alonso-Mora, and F. Laine, “Learning Mixed Strategies in Trajectory Games,” in Robotics: Science and Systems XVIII.   Robotics: Science and Systems Foundation, Jun. 2022. [Online]. Available: http://www.roboticsproceedings.org/rss18/p051.pdf
  64. W. Schwarting, A. Pierson, J. Alonso-Mora, S. Karaman, and D. Rus, “Social behavior for autonomous vehicles,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 116, no. 50, pp. 24 972–24 978, Dec. 2019, publisher: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. [Online]. Available: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1820676116
  65. L. Peters, D. Fridovich-Keil, C. J. Tomlin, and Z. N. Sunberg, “Inference-Based Strategy Alignment for General-Sum Differential Games,” in Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems, ser. AAMAS ’20.   Richland, SC: International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, May 2020, pp. 1037–1045.
  66. S. Le Cleac’h, M. Schwager, and Z. Manchester, “LUCIDGames: Online Unscented Inverse Dynamic Games for Adaptive Trajectory Prediction and Planning,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 5485–5492, Jul. 2021, conference Name: IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters.
  67. L. Peters, A. Bajcsy, C.-Y. Chiu, D. Fridovich-Keil, F. Laine, L. Ferranti, and J. Alonso-Mora, “Contingency Games for Multi-Agent Interaction,” Apr. 2023, arXiv:2304.05483 [cs]. [Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/2304.05483
  68. A. Lerner, Y. Chrysanthou, and D. Lischinski, “Crowds by Example,” Computer Graphics Forum, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 655–664, 2007, _eprint: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1467-8659.2007.01089.x. [Online]. Available: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-8659.2007.01089.x
  69. J. J. Sun, T. Karigo, D. Chakraborty, S. Mohanty, B. Wild, Q. Sun, C. Chen, D. Anderson, P. Perona, Y. Yue, and A. Kennedy, “The Multi-Agent Behavior Dataset: Mouse Dyadic Social Interactions,” Jan. 2022. [Online]. Available: https://openreview.net/forum?id=NevK78-K4bZ
  70. G. Casella, C. P. Robert, and M. T. Wells, “Generalized Accept-Reject Sampling Schemes,” Lecture Notes-Monograph Series, vol. 45, pp. 342–347, 2004, publisher: Institute of Mathematical Statistics. [Online]. Available: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4356322
  71. S. Macenski, F. Martín, R. White, and J. G. Clavero, “The Marathon 2: A Navigation System,” in 2020 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Oct. 2020, pp. 2718–2725, iSSN: 2153-0866.
  72. S. Macenski, T. Foote, B. Gerkey, C. Lalancette, and W. Woodall, “Robot Operating System 2: Design, architecture, and uses in the wild,” Science Robotics, vol. 7, no. 66, p. eabm6074, May 2022, publisher: American Association for the Advancement of Science. [Online]. Available: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/scirobotics.abm6074
  73. A. Biswas, A. Wang, G. Silvera, A. Steinfeld, and H. Admoni, “SocNavBench: A Grounded Simulation Testing Framework for Evaluating Social Navigation,” ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 26:1–26:24, Jul. 2022. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3476413
  74. S. Pellegrini, A. Ess, K. Schindler, and L. van Gool, “You’ll never walk alone: Modeling social behavior for multi-target tracking,” in 2009 IEEE 12th International Conference on Computer Vision, Sep. 2009, pp. 261–268, iSSN: 2380-7504.
Citations (1)

Summary

Paper to Video (Beta)

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 2 tweets with 0 likes about this paper.