Interactive Differentiable Simulation

Intelligent agents need a physical understanding of the world to predict the impact of their actions in the future. While learning-based models of the environment dynamics have contributed to significant improvements in sample efficiency compared to model-free reinforcement learning algorithms, they typically fail to generalize to system states beyond the training data, while often grounding their predictions on non-interpretable latent variables. We introduce Interactive Differentiable Simulation (IDS), a differentiable physics engine, that allows for efficient, accurate inference of physical properties of rigid-body systems. Integrated into deep learning architectures, our model is able to accomplish system identification using visual input, leading to an interpretable model of the world whose parameters have physical meaning. We present experiments showing automatic task-based robot design and parameter estimation for nonlinear dynamical systems by automatically calculating gradients in IDS. When integrated into an adaptive model-predictive control algorithm, our approach exhibits orders of magnitude improvements in sample efficiency over model-free reinforcement learning algorithms on challenging nonlinear control domains.

[1]  Tomislav Reichenbach A dynamic simulator for humanoid robots , 2008, Artificial Life and Robotics.

[2]  Christopher G. Atkeson,et al.  Neural networks and differential dynamic programming for reinforcement learning problems , 2016, 2016 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).

[3]  Jonas Degrave,et al.  A DIFFERENTIABLE PHYSICS ENGINE FOR DEEP LEARNING IN ROBOTICS , 2016, Front. Neurorobot..

[4]  Daniel L. K. Yamins,et al.  Flexible Neural Representation for Physics Prediction , 2018, NeurIPS.

[5]  Emanuel Todorov,et al.  Iterative Linear Quadratic Regulator Design for Nonlinear Biological Movement Systems , 2004, ICINCO.

[6]  Jiajun Wu,et al.  Learning to See Physics via Visual De-animation , 2017, NIPS.

[7]  Sergey Levine,et al.  Unsupervised Learning for Physical Interaction through Video Prediction , 2016, NIPS.

[8]  Roy Featherstone,et al.  Rigid Body Dynamics Algorithms , 2007 .

[9]  Connor Schenck,et al.  SPNets: Differentiable Fluid Dynamics for Deep Neural Networks , 2018, CoRL.

[10]  Zhijian Liu,et al.  Modeling Parts, Structure, and System Dynamics via Predictive Learning , 2019 .

[11]  Nicolas Mansard,et al.  Analytical Derivatives of Rigid Body Dynamics Algorithms , 2018, Robotics: Science and Systems.

[12]  Kostas E. Bekris,et al.  Fast Model Identification via Physics Engines for Data-Efficient Policy Search , 2017, IJCAI.

[13]  Yuval Tassa,et al.  MuJoCo: A physics engine for model-based control , 2012, 2012 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[14]  Jan Peters,et al.  Deep Lagrangian Networks: Using Physics as Model Prior for Deep Learning , 2019, ICLR.

[15]  Razvan Pascanu,et al.  Interaction Networks for Learning about Objects, Relations and Physics , 2016, NIPS.

[16]  Sergey Levine,et al.  Soft Actor-Critic: Off-Policy Maximum Entropy Deep Reinforcement Learning with a Stochastic Actor , 2018, ICML.

[17]  Yevgen Chebotar,et al.  Closing the Sim-to-Real Loop: Adapting Simulation Randomization with Real World Experience , 2018, 2019 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).

[18]  Yuval Tassa,et al.  DeepMind Control Suite , 2018, ArXiv.

[19]  Jiajun Wu,et al.  Learning Particle Dynamics for Manipulating Rigid Bodies, Deformable Objects, and Fluids , 2018, ICLR.

[20]  Athanasios S. Polydoros,et al.  Survey of Model-Based Reinforcement Learning: Applications on Robotics , 2017, J. Intell. Robotic Syst..

[21]  Martin A. Riedmiller,et al.  Approximate real-time optimal control based on sparse Gaussian process models , 2014, 2014 IEEE Symposium on Adaptive Dynamic Programming and Reinforcement Learning (ADPRL).

[22]  Patrick MacAlpine,et al.  Humanoid robots learning to walk faster: from the real world to simulation and back , 2013, AAMAS.

[23]  Yuval Tassa,et al.  Continuous control with deep reinforcement learning , 2015, ICLR.

[24]  Carl E. Rasmussen,et al.  PILCO: A Model-Based and Data-Efficient Approach to Policy Search , 2011, ICML.

[25]  Andrew W. Moore,et al.  Locally Weighted Learning for Control , 1997, Artificial Intelligence Review.

[26]  Joshua B. Tenenbaum,et al.  End-to-End Differentiable Physics for Learning and Control , 2018, NeurIPS.

[27]  J. Zico Kolter,et al.  OptNet: Differentiable Optimization as a Layer in Neural Networks , 2017, ICML.

[28]  Dieter Fox,et al.  Gaussian Processes and Reinforcement Learning for Identification and Control of an Autonomous Blimp , 2007, Proceedings 2007 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[29]  Bob Carpenter,et al.  The Stan Math Library: Reverse-Mode Automatic Differentiation in C++ , 2015, ArXiv.

[30]  Raia Hadsell,et al.  Graph networks as learnable physics engines for inference and control , 2018, ICML.

[31]  Emanuel Todorov,et al.  Physically consistent state estimation and system identification for contacts , 2015, 2015 IEEE-RAS 15th International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids).

[32]  Andrew W. Moore,et al.  Fast, Robust Adaptive Control by Learning only Forward Models , 1991, NIPS.

[33]  James M. Rehg,et al.  Aggressive driving with model predictive path integral control , 2016, 2016 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).

[34]  Jiajun Wu,et al.  Galileo: Perceiving Physical Object Properties by Integrating a Physics Engine with Deep Learning , 2015, NIPS.