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

A Rapid Adapting and Continual Learning Spiking Neural Network Path Planning Algorithm for Mobile Robots (2404.15524v1)

Published 23 Apr 2024 in cs.RO

Abstract: Mapping traversal costs in an environment and planning paths based on this map are important for autonomous navigation. We present a neurobotic navigation system that utilizes a Spiking Neural Network Wavefront Planner and E-prop learning to concurrently map and plan paths in a large and complex environment. We incorporate a novel method for mapping which, when combined with the Spiking Wavefront Planner, allows for adaptive planning by selectively considering any combination of costs. The system is tested on a mobile robot platform in an outdoor environment with obstacles and varying terrain. Results indicate that the system is capable of discerning features in the environment using three measures of cost, (1) energy expenditure by the wheels, (2) time spent in the presence of obstacles, and (3) terrain slope. In just twelve hours of online training, E-prop learns and incorporates traversal costs into the path planning maps by updating the delays in the Spiking Wavefront Planner. On simulated paths, the Spiking Wavefront Planner plans significantly shorter and lower cost paths than A* and RRT*. The spiking wavefront planner is compatible with neuromorphic hardware and could be used for applications requiring low size, weight, and power.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (30)
  1. H. Qin, S. Shao, T. Wang, X. Yu, Y. Jiang, and Z. Cao, “Review of autonomous path planning algorithms for mobile robots,” Drones, vol. 7, no. 3, 2023.
  2. X. Xiao, B. Liu, G. Warnell, and P. Stone, “Motion planning and control for mobile robot navigation using machine learning: a survey,” Autonomous Robots, vol. 46, p. 569–597, Mar. 2022.
  3. C. S. Tan, R. Mohd-Mokhtar, and M. R. Arshad, “A comprehensive review of coverage path planning in robotics using classical and heuristic algorithms,” IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 119310–119342, 2021.
  4. T. Hwu, A. Y. Wang, N. Oros, and J. L. Krichmar, “Adaptive robot path planning using a spiking neuron algorithm with axonal delays,” IEEE Transactions on Cognitive and Developmental Systems, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 126–137, 2018.
  5. J. L. Krichmar, N. A. Ketz, P. K. Pilly, and A. Soltoggio, “Flexible path planning through vicarious trial and error,” bioRxiv, 2021.
  6. P. E. Hart, N. J. Nilsson, and B. Raphael, “A formal basis for the heuristic determination of minimum cost paths,” IEEE Transactions on Systems Science and Cybernetics, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 100–107, 1968.
  7. A. Stentz, “Optimal and efficient path planning for partially-known environments,” in Proceedings of the 1994 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp. 3310–3317 vol.4, 1994.
  8. S. LAVALLE, “Rapidly-exploring random trees : a new tool for path planning,” Research Report 9811, 1998.
  9. Y. Kuwata, J. Teo, G. Fiore, S. Karaman, E. Frazzoli, and J. P. How, “Real-time motion planning with applications to autonomous urban driving,” IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 1105–1118, 2009.
  10. S. Karaman and E. Frazzoli, “Sampling-based algorithms for optimal motion planning,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 30, no. 7, pp. 846–894, 2011.
  11. M. W. Otte and E. Frazzoli, “Rrtx: Asymptotically optimal single-query sampling-based motion planning with quick replanning,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 35, pp. 797 – 822, 2016.
  12. R. C. Smith and P. Cheeseman, “On the representation and estimation of spatial uncertainty,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 56–68, 1986.
  13. S. Thrun and M. Montemerlo, “The graph slam algorithm with applications to large-scale mapping of urban structures,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 25, no. 5-6, pp. 403–429, 2006.
  14. R. Mur-Artal, J. Montiel, and J. Tardos, “Orb-slam: a versatile and accurate monocular slam system,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 31, pp. 1147 – 1163, 10 2015.
  15. M. Milford, G. Wyeth, and D. Prasser, “Ratslam: a hippocampal model for simultaneous localization and mapping,” in IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2004. Proceedings. ICRA ’04. 2004, vol. 1, pp. 403–408 Vol.1, 2004.
  16. S. Triest, M. G. Castro, P. Maheshwari, M. Sivaprakasam, W. Wang, and S. Scherer, “Learning risk-aware costmaps via inverse reinforcement learning for off-road navigation,” 2023.
  17. A. Shaban, X. Meng, J. Lee, B. Boots, and D. Fox, “Semantic terrain classification for off-road autonomous driving,” in Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Robot Learning (A. Faust, D. Hsu, and G. Neumann, eds.), vol. 164 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pp. 619–629, PMLR, 08–11 Nov 2022.
  18. J. A. Placed, J. Strader, H. Carrillo, N. A. Atanasov, V. Indelman, L. Carlone, and J. A. Castellanos, “A survey on active simultaneous localization and mapping: State of the art and new frontiers,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 39, pp. 1686–1705, 2022.
  19. F. Codevilla, M. Müller, A. Dosovitskiy, A. M. López, and V. Koltun, “End-to-end driving via conditional imitation learning,” CoRR, vol. abs/1710.02410, 2017.
  20. M. Bojarski, D. D. Testa, D. Dworakowski, B. Firner, B. Flepp, P. Goyal, L. D. Jackel, M. Monfort, U. Muller, J. Zhang, X. Zhang, J. Zhao, and K. Zieba, “End to end learning for self-driving cars,” CoRR, vol. abs/1604.07316, 2016.
  21. S. Ross, N. Melik-Barkhudarov, K. Shankar, A. Wendel, D. Dey, J. Bagnell, and M. Hebert, “Learning monocular reactive uav control in cluttered natural environments,” Proceedings - IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 11 2012.
  22. G. Kahn, P. Abbeel, and S. Levine, “BADGR: an autonomous self-supervised learning-based navigation system,” CoRR, vol. abs/2002.05700, 2020.
  23. T. Manderson, S. Wapnick, D. Meger, and G. Dudek, “Learning to drive off road on smooth terrain in unstructured environments using an on-board camera and sparse aerial images,” 2020.
  24. K. Zhang, F. Niroui, M. Ficocelli, and G. Nejat, “Robot navigation of environments with unknown rough terrain using deep reinforcement learning,” 2018 IEEE International Symposium on Safety, Security, and Rescue Robotics (SSRR), pp. 1–7, 2018.
  25. D. Shah and S. Levine, “ViKiNG: Vision-based kilometer-scale navigation with geographic hints,” Robotics: Science and Systems Foundation, jun 2022.
  26. G. Bellec, F. Scherr, A. Subramoney, E. Hajek, D. Salaj, R. Legenstein, and W. Maass, “A solution to the learning dilemma for recurrent networks of spiking neurons,” Nature Communications, July 2020.
  27. X.-S. Yang, “Random walks and optimization,” in Nature-Inspired Optimization Algorithms, ch. 3, pp. 45–65, Academic Press, 2014.
  28. H. Espino, R. Bain, and J. L. Krichmar, “Selective memory replay improves exploration in a spiking wavefront planner,” in 2023 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN), pp. 1–8, 2023.
  29. K. D. Fischl, K. Fair, W.-Y. Tsai, J. Sampson, and A. Andreou, “Path planning on the truenorth neurosynaptic system,” in 2017 IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems (ISCAS), pp. 1–4, 2017.
  30. J. Xing, X. Zou, and J. L. Krichmar, “Neuromodulated patience for robot and self-driving vehicle navigation,” CoRR, vol. abs/1909.06533, 2019.

Summary

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

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

Tweets