Simulation, Modeling, and Programming for Autonomous Robots

Starting from a mechanics point of view, the human (or humanoid) body is both a redundant system and an underactuated one. It is redundant because the number of degrees of freedom is much greater than the dimension of the tasks to be performed: around 640 muscles for humans and 30 motors for humanoid robots. It is underactuated because there is no direct actuator allowing the body to move from one place to another place: to do so human and humanoid robots should use their internal degrees of freedom and actuate all their limbs following a periodic process (named bipedal locomotion!). By considering first that motions are continuous functions from time to space (i.e. trajectories), and second that actions are compositions of motions, actions appear as sequences of trajectories. The images of the trajectories in spaces are named paths. Paths represent geometric traces left by the motions in spaces. The reasoning holds for the real space, the configuration and the control space. Therefore actions appear as continuous simple paths in high dimensional spaces. A simple path embodies the entire action. It integrates into a single data structure all the complexity of the action. The decomposition of the action into sub-actions (e.g., walk to, grasp, give) appears as the decomposition of the path into sub-paths. Each elementary sub-path is selected among an infinite number of possibilities within some submanifolds (e.g., grasp fast or slowly, grasp while bending the legs or not). All complex cognitive and motor control processes that give rise to an action in the real world are reflected by the structure of paths in the body control space. In this framework, symbols may be defined as submanifolds that partition the control space. Such a partition decomposes paths into sub-paths. From this perspective the questions are: – Motion Segmentation: what are the invariant sub-manifolds that define the structure of a given action? – Motion Generation: among all the solution paths within a given submanifold (i.e. among all the possibilities to solve a given sub-task) what is the underlying law that converges to the selection of a particular motion? The talk overviews recent results obtained in this framework (including whole body manipulation, locomotion trajectory generation, action recognition) and illustrated from the HRP2-14 humanoid platform. I. Noda et al. (Eds.): SIMPAR 2012, LNAI 7628, p. 1, 2012. c © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012 I. Noda et al. (Eds.): SIMPAR 201 © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelb Cybernics: Fusion

[1]  David Vernon,et al.  A Roadmap for Cognitive Development in Humanoid Robots , 2011, Cognitive Systems Monographs.

[2]  Mahesan Niranjan,et al.  On-line Q-learning using connectionist systems , 1994 .

[3]  Jacek M. Zurada,et al.  Computational intelligence methods for rule-based data understanding , 2004, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[4]  Olivier Michel,et al.  Cyberbotics Ltd. Webots™: Professional Mobile Robot Simulation , 2004, ArXiv.

[5]  Hyun Kim,et al.  Introduction to system architecture for a robotic computer , 2011, 2011 8th International Conference on Ubiquitous Robots and Ambient Intelligence (URAI).

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

[7]  Dong-Soo Kwon,et al.  A dual-layer user model based cognitive system for user-adaptive service robots , 2011, 2011 RO-MAN.

[8]  Russ Tedrake,et al.  Simulation-based LQR-trees with input and state constraints , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[9]  Masaki Ogino,et al.  Cognitive Developmental Robotics: A Survey , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Autonomous Mental Development.

[10]  Huy L. Nguyen Approximate Nearest Neighbor Search in ℓp , 2013, ArXiv.

[11]  Eun-Sun Cho,et al.  ICARS : Integrated Control Architecture for the Robotic Mediator in Smart Environments: A Software Framework for the Robotic Mediator Collaborating with Smart Environments , 2012, 2012 IEEE 14th International Conference on High Performance Computing and Communication & 2012 IEEE 9th International Conference on Embedded Software and Systems.

[12]  David Vernon,et al.  Reconciling Autonomy with Utility: A Roadmap and Architecture for Cognitive Development , 2011, BICA.

[13]  Moritz Tenorth,et al.  KNOWROB — knowledge processing for autonomous personal robots , 2009, 2009 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[14]  Ron Sun,et al.  The importance of cognitive architectures: an analysis based on CLARION , 2007, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..

[15]  M. V. D. Panne,et al.  SIMBICON: simple biped locomotion control , 2007, SIGGRAPH 2007.

[16]  Richard T. Vaughan,et al.  The Player/Stage Project: Tools for Multi-Robot and Distributed Sensor Systems , 2003 .

[17]  Elena R. Messina,et al.  A Framework For Autonomy Levels For Unmanned Systems (ALFUS) , 2005 .

[18]  Stefano Carpin,et al.  USARSim: a robot simulator for research and education , 2007, Proceedings 2007 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[19]  M. Levas OBBTree : A Hierarchical Structure for Rapid Interference Detection , .

[20]  Peter K. Allen,et al.  Graspit! A versatile simulator for robotic grasping , 2004, IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine.

[21]  Tom Froese,et al.  Autonomy: A Review and a Reappraisal , 2007, ECAL.

[22]  Giulio Sandini,et al.  A Survey of Artificial Cognitive Systems: Implications for the Autonomous Development of Mental Capabilities in Computational Agents , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[23]  James J. Kuffner,et al.  OpenRAVE: A Planning Architecture for Autonomous Robotics , 2008 .