Robotics: Science and Systems XIII 2017
DOI: 10.15607/rss.2017.xiii.067
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Experience-driven Predictive Control with Robust Constraint Satisfaction under Time-Varying State Uncertainty

Abstract: Abstract-We present an extension to Experience-driven Predictive Control (EPC) that leverages a Gaussian belief propagation strategy to compute an uncertainty set bounding the evolution of the system state in the presence of time-varying state uncertainty. This uncertainty set is used to tighten the constraints in the predictive control formulation via a chance constrained approach, thereby providing a probabilistic guarantee of constraint satisfaction. The parameterized form of the controllers produced by EPC… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
7
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
1
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This manuscript refines an earlier conference presentation of the Robust EPC algorithm (Desaraju et al, 2017), including a more detailed discussion of the model adaptation techniques in Section 2.5. We also present new simulation results with a ground robot (Section 3.1), and several new experimental studies with three different platforms: a skid-steer ground robot equipped with a laser-based localization system (Section 3.3), a hexarotor aerial robot equipped with a vision-based localization system (Section 3.4), and additional results with a small quadrotor aerial robot executing aggressive maneuvers in a strong, spatially varying wind field (Section 3.2.4).…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 54%
“…This manuscript refines an earlier conference presentation of the Robust EPC algorithm (Desaraju et al, 2017), including a more detailed discussion of the model adaptation techniques in Section 2.5. We also present new simulation results with a ground robot (Section 3.1), and several new experimental studies with three different platforms: a skid-steer ground robot equipped with a laser-based localization system (Section 3.3), a hexarotor aerial robot equipped with a vision-based localization system (Section 3.4), and additional results with a small quadrotor aerial robot executing aggressive maneuvers in a strong, spatially varying wind field (Section 3.2.4).…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 54%
“…Due to many technical challenges in stochastic MPC and some of the issues discussed above, many stochastic learning-based MPC schemes come with little theoretical analysis, but they have nevertheless been very successful in practical implementations. For instance, Desaraju and colleagues (77,78) presented parametric learning-based MPC approaches for robotic systems that enhance the model of a quadrotor over time while taking approximate uncertainty in the prediction into account through constraint tightening. Similarly, McKinnon & Schoellig (79) presented an implementation for trajectory tracking of an off-road robotic vehicle based on linear Bayesian regression for the actuator dynamics, with the particular focus of mitigating the conflict between fast adaptation and long term learning.…”
Section: Stochastic Parametric Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This means that all data gathered by the robot can be grouped into one model and used to train any model parameters and validate them to avoid overfitting. This class of methods has shown impressive results control of ground robots [2], [7], quadrotors [6], manipulators [5] and humanoid robots [8]. This style of approach can learn new dynamics quickly, but if the robot dynamics can change due to a factor that is not included in the model (e.g.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In particular, probabilistic models are used since they provide a measure of model uncertainty which can naturally be used to derive an upper bound on model error. Two common methods for doing this are GP regression [1]- [3] and various forms of local linear regression [4]- [6]. The Fig.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%