Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
129 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
28 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

Safety-Critical Planning and Control for Dynamic Obstacle Avoidance Using Control Barrier Functions (2403.19122v2)

Published 28 Mar 2024 in cs.RO and math.OC

Abstract: Dynamic obstacle avoidance is a challenging topic for optimal control and optimization-based trajectory planning problems. Many existing works use Control Barrier Functions (CBFs) to enforce safety constraints for control systems. CBFs are typically formulated based on the distance to obstacles, or integrated with path planning algorithms as a safety enhancement tool. However, these approaches usually require knowledge of the obstacle boundary equations or have very slow computational efficiency. In this paper, we propose a framework based on model predictive control (MPC) with discrete-time high-order CBFs (DHOCBFs) to generate a collision-free trajectory. The DHOCBFs are first obtained from convex polytopes generated through grid mapping, without the need to know the boundary equations of obstacles. Additionally, a path planning algorithm is incorporated into this framework to ensure the global optimality of the generated trajectory. We demonstrate through numerical examples that our framework allows a unicycle robot to safely and efficiently navigate tight, dynamically changing environments with both convex and nonconvex obstacles. By comparing our method to established CBF-based benchmarks, we demonstrate superior computing efficiency, length optimality, and feasibility in trajectory generation and obstacle avoidance.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (22)
  1. A. D. Ames, J. W. Grizzle, and P. Tabuada, “Control barrier function based quadratic programs with application to adaptive cruise control,” in 53rd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, 2014, pp. 6271–6278.
  2. A. D. Ames, X. Xu, J. W. Grizzle, and P. Tabuada, “Control barrier function based quadratic programs for safety critical systems,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 62, no. 8, pp. 3861–3876, 2016.
  3. S. Liu, J. Zeng, K. Sreenath, and C. A. Belta, “Iterative convex optimization for model predictive control with discrete-time high-order control barrier functions,” in 2023 American Control Conference (ACC), 2023, pp. 3368–3375.
  4. J. Zeng, Z. Li, and K. Sreenath, “Enhancing feasibility and safety of nonlinear model predictive control with discrete-time control barrier functions,” in 2021 60th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), 2021, pp. 6137–6144.
  5. S. Liu, M. Watterson, K. Mohta, K. Sun, S. Bhattacharya, C. J. Taylor, and V. Kumar, “Planning dynamically feasible trajectories for quadrotors using safe flight corridors in 3-d complex environments,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 1688–1695, 2017.
  6. A. Agrawal and K. Sreenath, “Discrete control barrier functions for safety-critical control of discrete systems with application to bipedal robot navigation.” in Robotics: Science and Systems, vol. 13.   Cambridge, MA, USA, 2017.
  7. J. Zeng, B. Zhang, Z. Li, and K. Sreenath, “Safety-critical control using optimal-decay control barrier function with guaranteed point-wise feasibility,” in 2021 American Control Conference (ACC), 2021, pp. 3856–3863.
  8. R. Grandia, A. J. Taylor, A. D. Ames, and M. Hutter, “Multi-layered safety for legged robots via control barrier functions and model predictive control,” in 2021 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2021, pp. 8352–8358.
  9. H. Ma, X. Zhang, S. E. Li, Z. Lin, Y. Lyu, and S. Zheng, “Feasibility enhancement of constrained receding horizon control using generalized control barrier function,” in 2021 4th IEEE International Conference on Industrial Cyber-Physical Systems (ICPS), 2021, pp. 551–557.
  10. Y. Xiong, D.-H. Zhai, M. Tavakoli, and Y. Xia, “Discrete-time control barrier function: High-order case and adaptive case,” IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, pp. 1–9, 2022.
  11. S. He, J. Zeng, and K. Sreenath, “Autonomous racing with multiple vehicles using a parallelized optimization with safety guarantee using control barrier functions,” in 2022 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2022, pp. 3444–3451.
  12. Z. Li, J. Zeng, A. Thirugnanam, and K. Sreenath, “Bridging model-based safety and model-free reinforcement learning through system identification of low dimensional linear models,” in Proceedings of Robotics: Science and Systems, 2022.
  13. G. Paolo, I. Ferrara, and L. Magni, “Mpc for robot manipulators with integral sliding mode generation,” IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 1299–1307, 2017.
  14. N. Scianca, D. De Simone, L. Lanari, and G. Oriolo, “Mpc for humanoid gait generation: Stability and feasibility,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 1171–1188, 2020.
  15. T. D. Son and Q. Nguyen, “Safety-critical control for non-affine nonlinear systems with application on autonomous vehicle,” in 2019 IEEE 58th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), 2019, pp. 7623–7628.
  16. J. M. Eklund, J. Sprinkle, and S. S. Sastry, “Switched and symmetric pursuit/evasion games using online model predictive control with application to autonomous aircraft,” IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 604–620, 2012.
  17. J. V. Frasch, A. Gray, M. Zanon, H. J. Ferreau, S. Sager, F. Borrelli, and M. Diehl, “An auto-generated nonlinear mpc algorithm for real-time obstacle avoidance of ground vehicles,” in 2013 European Control Conference (ECC), 2013, pp. 4136–4141.
  18. A. Liniger, A. Domahidi, and M. Morari, “Optimization-based autonomous racing of 1: 43 scale rc cars,” Optimal Control Applications and Methods, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 628–647, 2015.
  19. X. Zhang, A. Liniger, and F. Borrelli, “Optimization-based collision avoidance,” IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 972–983, 2020.
  20. D. Harabor and A. Grastien, “Online graph pruning for pathfinding on grid maps,” in Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, vol. 25, no. 1, 2011, pp. 1114–1119.
  21. M. Sun and D. Wang, “Initial shift issues on discrete-time iterative learning control with system relative degree,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 144–148, 2003.
  22. B. Stellato, G. Banjac, P. Goulart, A. Bemporad, and S. Boyd, “Osqp: An operator splitting solver for quadratic programs,” Mathematical Programming Computation, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 637–672, 2020.
Citations (3)

Summary

  • The paper introduces the iMPC-DHOCBF framework that integrates Control Barrier Functions into MPC for collision-free trajectory planning without prior obstacle boundary equations.
  • It leverages Discrete-Time Control Barrier Functions within a convex MPC setup to achieve notable computational efficiency in dynamic environments.
  • The method demonstrates scalability and flexibility for real-time obstacle avoidance, paving the way for advanced applications in autonomous systems.

Safety-Critical Planning and Control for Dynamic Obstacle Avoidance Using Control Barrier Functions

The paper "Safety-Critical Planning and Control for Dynamic Obstacle Avoidance Using Control Barrier Functions" by Shuo Liu and Yihui Mao presents an advanced framework for trajectory planning and control in environments with dynamic obstacles. The research addresses key challenges inherent in obstacle avoidance for optimal control systems by leveraging Control Barrier Functions (CBFs) while integrating them into a Model Predictive Control (MPC) framework. A novel iterative approach named iMPC-DHOCBF is introduced, showcasing enhanced computational efficiency and safety assurance.

Key Contributions

The authors articulate a comprehensive approach to implement collision-free trajectory planning without the prior need for obstacle boundary equations knowledge. The framework utilizes Discrete-Time Control Barrier Functions (DCBFs) in a convex MPC setup, facilitating real-time operations in dynamic environments. This methodology is of particular importance as it deals with both convex and non-convex obstacles, providing a robust solution to the inherent non-linear and non-convex aspects typically encountered in dynamic obstacle avoidance.

Theoretical and Practical Implications

The research extends significant implications both theoretically and practically:

  1. Numerical Efficacy: Demonstrated through numerical analyses, the proposed iMPC-DHOCBF framework exhibits remarkable computational efficiency, navigating complex environments with a noteworthy success rate in obstacle avoidance and trajectory planning.
  2. Optimization and Feasibility: By utilizing a discrete-time variant of the high-order control barrier functions, the framework presents a feasible solution for implementing safety in planning algorithms, particularly in large horizon lengths scenarios where traditional methods may falter.
  3. Scalability and Flexibility: The iterative method showcases scalable attributes by dynamically generating safe trajectories without prior mapping of the obstacle boundaries, thus emphasizing adaptability across different scenarios.
  4. Future Applications: The methodology potentially paves the way for future implementations in autonomous systems where real-time dynamic planning is crucial, including autonomous driving and robotic navigation.

Speculation on Future Directions

While the proposed framework addresses many existing challenges, the paper hints at further research areas. Enhanced techniques for real-time adjustment without pre-knowledge of dynamic obstacles present a promising avenue. Furthermore, the integration of learning-based approaches with the presented model could see the optimization of parameters in real-time, adapting to dynamic changes seamlessly.

Overall, this research contributes to the field of robotics and control theory by offering a sophisticated and efficient solution to trajectory planning in dynamic environments. As the field progresses, further studies could focus on integrating this framework with other emerging technologies in artificial intelligence and autonomous systems, amplifying the scalability and efficacy in larger, more complex environments.

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