Inevitable collision states. A step towards safer robots?

An inevitable collision state for a robotic system can be defined as a state for which, no matter what the future trajectory followed by the system is, a collision with an obstacle eventually occurs. An inevitable collision state takes into account both the dynamics of the system and the obstacles, fixed or moving. The main contribution of this paper is to lay down and explore this novel concept (and the companion concept of inevitable collision obstacle). Formal definitions of the inevitable collision states and obstacles are given. Properties fundamental for their characterisation are established. This concept is very general and can be useful both for navigation and motion planning purposes (for its own safety, a robotic system should never find itself in an inevitable collision state). The interest of this concept is illustrated by a safe motion planning example.

[1]  Oliver Brock,et al.  High-speed navigation using the global dynamic window approach , 1999, Proceedings 1999 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Cat. No.99CH36288C).

[2]  Reid G. Simmons,et al.  The lane-curvature method for local obstacle avoidance , 1998, Proceedings. 1998 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. Innovations in Theory, Practice and Applications (Cat. No.98CH36190).

[3]  K. Madhava Krishna,et al.  On the influence of sensor capacities and environment dynamics onto collision-free motion plans , 2002, IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[4]  Amy R. Pritchett,et al.  Experimental Studies Of Pilot Performance At Collision Avoidance During Closely Spaced Parallel Approaches , 1997 .

[5]  Bruce Randall Donald,et al.  On the complexity of kinodynamic planning , 1988, [Proceedings 1988] 29th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[6]  Reid G. Simmons,et al.  The curvature-velocity method for local obstacle avoidance , 1996, Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[7]  S. LaValle.  Rapidly-exploring random trees : a new tool for path planning , 1998 .

[8]  Steven M. LaValle,et al.  Randomized Kinodynamic Planning , 1999, Proceedings 1999 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Cat. No.99CH36288C).

[9]  Wolfram Burgard,et al.  The dynamic window approach to collision avoidance , 1997, IEEE Robotics Autom. Mag..

[10]  Jean-Claude Latombe,et al.  Robot motion planning , 1970, The Kluwer international series in engineering and computer science.

[11]  Jean-Claude Latombe,et al.  Randomized Kinodynamic Motion Planning with Moving Obstacles , 2002, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[12]  Wyatt S. Newman,et al.  Reflexive collision avoidance: a generalized approach , 1993, [1993] Proceedings IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[13]  S. LaValle,et al.  Randomized Kinodynamic Planning , 2001 .

[14]  Christian Laugier,et al.  Towards real-time global motion planning in a dynamic environment using the NLVO concept , 2002, IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[15]  Tomás Lozano-Pérez,et al.  Spatial Planning: A Configuration Space Approach , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Computers.

[16]  Paolo Fiorini,et al.  Motion Planning in Dynamic Environments Using Velocity Obstacles , 1998, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[17]  Rodney Teo.  Computing danger zones for provably safe closely spaced parallel approaches: Theory and experiment , 2003 .

[18]  Katsuhiko Ogata,et al.  Modern Control Engineering , 1970 .

[19]  Tomás Lozano-Pérez,et al.  Spatial Planning: A Configuration Space Approach , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Computers.

[20]  Thierry Fraichard,et al.  Dynamic trajectory planning with dynamic constraints: A 'state-time space' approach , 1993, Proceedings of 1993 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS '93).

[21]  Patrick Gordon Xavier.  Provably-good approximation algorithms for optimal kinodynamic robot motion plans , 1992 .