Reconfigurable Robot Identification from Motion Data (2403.10496v1)
Abstract: Integrating LLMs (VLMs) and Vision-LLMs (VLMs) with robotic systems enables robots to process and understand complex natural language instructions and visual information. However, a fundamental challenge remains: for robots to fully capitalize on these advancements, they must have a deep understanding of their physical embodiment. The gap between AI models cognitive capabilities and the understanding of physical embodiment leads to the following question: Can a robot autonomously understand and adapt to its physical form and functionalities through interaction with its environment? This question underscores the transition towards developing self-modeling robots without reliance on external sensory or pre-programmed knowledge about their structure. Here, we propose a meta self modeling that can deduce robot morphology through proprioception (the internal sense of position and movement). Our study introduces a 12 DoF reconfigurable legged robot, accompanied by a diverse dataset of 200k unique configurations, to systematically investigate the relationship between robotic motion and robot morphology. Utilizing a deep neural network model comprising a robot signature encoder and a configuration decoder, we demonstrate the capability of our system to accurately predict robot configurations from proprioceptive signals. This research contributes to the field of robotic self-modeling, aiming to enhance understanding of their physical embodiment and adaptability in real world scenarios.
- M. Ahn, A. Brohan, N. Brown, Y. Chebotar, O. Cortes, B. David, C. Finn, C. Fu, K. Gopalakrishnan, K. Hausman, et al., “Do as i can, not as i say: Grounding language in robotic affordances,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.01691, 2022.
- Y. Cao and C. G. Lee, “Ground manipulator primitive tasks to executable actions using large language models,” in Proceedings of the AAAI Symposium Series, vol. 2, no. 1, 2023, pp. 502–507.
- B. Yu, H. Kasaei, and M. Cao, “L3mvn: Leveraging large language models for visual target navigation,” in 2023 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). IEEE, 2023, pp. 3554–3560.
- Y. Ding, X. Zhang, C. Paxton, and S. Zhang, “Task and motion planning with large language models for object rearrangement,” in 2023 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). IEEE, 2023, pp. 2086–2092.
- J. Bongard, V. Zykov, and H. Lipson, “Resilient machines through continuous self-modeling,” Science, vol. 314, no. 5802, pp. 1118–1121, 2006.
- G.-Z. Yang, J. Bellingham, P. E. Dupont, P. Fischer, L. Floridi, R. Full, N. Jacobstein, V. Kumar, M. McNutt, R. Merrifield, et al., “The grand challenges of science robotics,” Science robotics, vol. 3, no. 14, p. eaar7650, 2018.
- A. Cully, J. Clune, D. Tarapore, and J.-B. Mouret, “Robots that can adapt like animals,” Nature, vol. 521, no. 7553, pp. 503–507, 2015.
- U. Proske and S. C. Gandevia, “The proprioceptive senses: their roles in signaling body shape, body position and movement, and muscle force,” Physiological reviews, 2012.
- B. O’Shaughnessy, “Proprioception and the body image,” The body and the self, pp. 175–203, 1995.
- E. Jankowska, “Interneuronal relay in spinal pathways from proprioceptors,” Progress in neurobiology, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 335–378, 1992.
- R. Kwiatkowski, Y. Hu, B. Chen, and H. Lipson, “On the origins of self-modeling,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.02010, 2022.
- N. V. Boulgouris, D. Hatzinakos, and K. N. Plataniotis, “Gait recognition: a challenging signal processing technology for biometric identification,” IEEE signal processing magazine, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 78–90, 2005.
- F. Han, B. Reily, W. Hoff, and H. Zhang, “Space-time representation of people based on 3d skeletal data: A review,” Computer Vision and Image Understanding, vol. 158, pp. 85–105, 2017.
- B. C. Munsell, A. Temlyakov, C. Qu, and S. Wang, “Person identification using full-body motion and anthropometric biometrics from kinect videos,” in European Conference on Computer Vision. Springer, 2012, pp. 91–100.
- G. G. Gallup Jr, “Self-awareness and the emergence of mind in primates,” American Journal of Primatology, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 237–248, 1982.
- P. Rochat, “Five levels of self-awareness as they unfold early in life,” Consciousness and cognition, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 717–731, 2003.
- B. Chen, R. Kwiatkowski, C. Vondrick, and H. Lipson, “Fully body visual self-modeling of robot morphologies,” Science Robotics, vol. 7, no. 68, p. eabn1944, 2022.
- A. Dearden and Y. Demiris, “Learning forward models for robots,” in IJCAI, vol. 5, 2005, p. 1440.
- D. M. Wolpert, R. C. Miall, and M. Kawato, “Internal models in the cerebellum,” Trends in cognitive sciences, vol. 2, no. 9, pp. 338–347, 1998.
- Y. Hu, B. Chen, and H. Lipson, “Egocentric visual self-modeling for legged robot locomotion,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.03386, 2022.
- R. Kwiatkowski and H. Lipson, “Task-agnostic self-modeling machines,” Science Robotics, vol. 4, no. 26, p. eaau9354, 2019.
- J. Bongard and H. Lipson, “Nonlinear system identification using coevolution of models and tests,” IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 361–384, 2005.
- T. Wu and J. Movellan, “Semi-parametric gaussian process for robot system identification,” in 2012 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2012, pp. 725–731.
- W. Yu, J. Tan, C. K. Liu, and G. Turk, “Preparing for the unknown: Learning a universal policy with online system identification,” 2017.
- D. Bruder, C. D. Remy, and R. Vasudevan, “Nonlinear system identification of soft robot dynamics using koopman operator theory,” in 2019 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2019, pp. 6244–6250.
- K. Rakelly, A. Zhou, C. Finn, S. Levine, and D. Quillen, “Efficient off-policy meta-reinforcement learning via probabilistic context variables,” in International conference on machine learning. PMLR, 2019, pp. 5331–5340.
- V. Kurin, M. Igl, T. Rocktäschel, W. Boehmer, and S. Whiteson, “My body is a cage: the role of morphology in graph-based incompatible control,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.01856, 2020.
- W. Huang, I. Mordatch, and D. Pathak, “One policy to control them all: Shared modular policies for agent-agnostic control,” in International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 2020, pp. 4455–4464.
- A. Gupta, L. Fan, S. Ganguli, and L. Fei-Fei, “Metamorph: Learning universal controllers with transformers,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.11931, 2022.
- B. Trabucco, M. Phielipp, and G. Berseth, “Anymorph: Learning transferable polices by inferring agent morphology,” in International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 2022, pp. 21 677–21 691.
- M. Yim, W.-M. Shen, B. Salemi, D. Rus, M. Moll, H. Lipson, E. Klavins, and G. S. Chirikjian, “Modular self-reconfigurable robot systems [grand challenges of robotics],” IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 43–52, 2007.
- A. Castano and P. Will, “Representing and discovering the configuration of conro robots,” in Proceedings 2001 ICRA. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Cat. No. 01CH37164), vol. 4. IEEE, 2001, pp. 3503–3509.
- M. Ceccarelli and C. Lanni, “A multi-objective optimum design of general 3r manipulators for prescribed workspace limits,” Mechanism and machine theory, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 119–132, 2004.
- A. Yun, D. Moon, J. Ha, S. Kang, and W. Lee, “Modman: an advanced reconfigurable manipulator system with genderless connector and automatic kinematic modeling algorithm,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 4225–4232, 2020.
- S. Ha, S. Coros, A. Alspach, J. Kim, and K. Yamane, “Computational co-optimization of design parameters and motion trajectories for robotic systems,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 37, no. 13-14, pp. 1521–1536, 2018.
- J. Kim, A. Alspach, and K. Yamane, “Snapbot: A reconfigurable legged robot,” in 2017 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). IEEE, 2017, pp. 5861–5867.
- S. Ha, S. Coros, A. Alspach, J. Kim, and K. Yamane, “Task-based limb optimization for legged robots,” in 2016 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). IEEE, 2016, pp. 2062–2068.
- J. Hu, L. Shen, and G. Sun, “Squeeze-and-excitation networks,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2018, pp. 7132–7141.
- A. Paszke, S. Gross, F. Massa, A. Lerer, J. Bradbury, G. Chanan, T. Killeen, Z. Lin, N. Gimelshein, L. Antiga, et al., “Pytorch: An imperative style, high-performance deep learning library,” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 32, 2019.
- L. Li, K. Jamieson, G. DeSalvo, A. Rostamizadeh, and A. Talwalkar, “Hyperband: A novel bandit-based approach to hyperparameter optimization,” The Journal of Machine Learning Research, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 6765–6816, 2017.
- L. Biewald, “Experiment tracking with weights and biases,” 2020, software available from wandb.com. [Online]. Available: https://www.wandb.com/
- D. P. Kingma and J. Ba, “Adam: A method for stochastic optimization,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980, 2014.
- S. Ioffe and C. Szegedy, “Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift,” in International conference on machine learning. PMLR, 2015, pp. 448–456.
- N. Srivastava, G. Hinton, A. Krizhevsky, I. Sutskever, and R. Salakhutdinov, “Dropout: a simple way to prevent neural networks from overfitting,” The journal of machine learning research, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 1929–1958, 2014.
- S. Hochreiter and J. Schmidhuber, “Long short-term memory,” Neural computation, vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 1735–1780, 1997.