Maximally satisfying LTL action planning

We focus on autonomous robot action planning problem from Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) specifications, where the action refers to a “simple” motion or manipulation task, such as “go from A to B” or “grasp a ball”. At the high-level planning layer, we propose an algorithm to synthesize a maximally satisfying discrete control strategy while taking into account that the robot's action executions may fail. Furthermore, we interface the high-level plan with the robot's low-level controller through a reactive middle-layer formalism called Behavior Trees (BTs). We demonstrate the proposed framework using a NAO robot capable of walking, ball grasping and ball dropping actions.

[1]  Ronald L. Rivest,et al.  Introduction to Algorithms , 1990 .

[2]  Ufuk Topcu,et al.  Towards formal synthesis of reactive controllers for dexterous robotic manipulation , 2012, 2012 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[3]  Xin-She Yang,et al.  Introduction to Algorithms , 2021, Nature-Inspired Optimization Algorithms.

[4]  Ufuk Topcu,et al.  Optimal control of non-deterministic systems for a computationally efficient fragment of temporal logic , 2013, 52nd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.

[5]  Ufuk Topcu,et al.  Receding Horizon Temporal Logic Planning , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[6]  Hadas Kress-Gazit,et al.  Iterative temporal motion planning for hybrid systems in partially unknown environments , 2013, HSCC '13.

[7]  Pierre Wolper,et al.  Simple on-the-fly automatic verification of linear temporal logic , 1995, PSTV.

[8]  Emilio Frazzoli,et al.  Least-violating control strategy synthesis with safety rules , 2013, HSCC '13.

[9]  Petter Ögren,et al.  Towards a unified behavior trees framework for robot control , 2014, 2014 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).

[10]  Joël Ouaknine,et al.  State/Event-Based Software Model Checking , 2004, IFM.

[11]  Georgios E. Fainekos,et al.  Approximate solutions for the minimal revision problem of specification automata , 2012, 2012 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[12]  Christel Baier,et al.  PROBMELA: a modeling language for communicating probabilistic processes , 2004, Proceedings. Second ACM and IEEE International Conference on Formal Methods and Models for Co-Design, 2004. MEMOCODE '04..

[13]  Emilio Frazzoli,et al.  Incremental sampling-based algorithm for minimum-violation motion planning , 2013, 52nd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.

[14]  Calin Belta,et al.  Optimal path planning for surveillance with temporal-logic constraints* , 2011, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[15]  Moshe Y. Vardi,et al.  Motion Planning with Complex Goals , 2011, IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine.

[16]  Lydia E. Kavraki,et al.  Motion Planning With Dynamics by a Synergistic Combination of Layers of Planning , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.

[17]  Calin Belta,et al.  Managing non-determinism in symbolic robot motion planning and control , 2007, Proceedings 2007 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[18]  Karl Henrik Johansson,et al.  Revising motion planning under Linear Temporal Logic specifications in partially known workspaces , 2013, 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[19]  Christel Baier,et al.  Principles of model checking , 2008 .

[20]  Karl Henrik Johansson,et al.  Motion and action planning under LTL specifications using navigation functions and action description language , 2013, 2013 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[21]  Viktor Schuppan,et al.  Shortest Counterexamples for Symbolic Model Checking of LTL with Past , 2005, TACAS.

[22]  Hadas Kress-Gazit,et al.  Temporal-Logic-Based Reactive Mission and Motion Planning , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.