Robotic sensorimotor learning in continuous domains

The authors propose that some aspects of task-based learning in robotics can be approached using nativist and constructionist views on human sensorimotor development as a metaphor. They use findings in developmental psychology and neurophysiology, as well as machine perception, to guide the overall design of robotic system that attempts to learn sensorimotor binding rules for simple actions. Visually driven grasping was chosen as the experimental task. The learning was empirical in nature, and was done by having the robot observe repeated interactions with the task environment. The technique of nonparametric projection pursuit regression was used to accomplish reinforcement data sets that capture task invariants. The learning process generally implied failures along the way. Therefore, the mechanics of the untrained robotic system must be able to tolerate mistakes during learning and not be damaged. This problem was addressed by the use of an instrumented compliant robot wrist that controlled impact forces.<<ETX>>

[1]  G. Drescher Genetic AI: Translating piaget into lisp , 1986 .

[2]  Richard P. Paul,et al.  Design of a Tool-Surrounding Compliant Instrumented Wrist , 1991 .

[3]  M Kuperstein,et al.  Neural model of adaptive hand-eye coordination for single postures. , 1988, Science.

[4]  R. Held,et al.  Visually Guided Reaching in Infant Monkeys after Restricted Rearing , 1967, Science.

[5]  Andrew W. Moore,et al.  Variable Resolution Dynamic Programming , 1991, ML Workshop.

[6]  A. Diamond Developmental Time Course in Human Infants and Infant Monkeys, and the Neural Bases of, Inhibitory Control in Reaching a , 1990, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[7]  W. Thomas Miller,et al.  Sensor-based control of robotic manipulators using a general learning algorithm , 1987, IEEE J. Robotics Autom..

[8]  J. Piaget,et al.  The origin of intelligence in the child , 1997 .

[9]  J. Friedman,et al.  Projection Pursuit Regression , 1981 .

[10]  Alan D. Christiansen,et al.  Experiments in Robot Learning , 1989, ML.

[11]  Andrew W. Moore,et al.  Acquisition of Dynamic Control Knowledge for a Robotic Manipulator , 1990, ML.

[12]  Robin Sibson,et al.  What is projection pursuit , 1987 .

[13]  James S. Albus,et al.  New Approach to Manipulator Control: The Cerebellar Model Articulation Controller (CMAC)1 , 1975 .

[14]  Ruzena Bajcsy,et al.  A medium-complexity compliant end effector , 1988, Proceedings. 1988 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[15]  E. Gibson Principles of Perceptual Learning and Development , 1969 .

[16]  Jerome H. Friedman,et al.  SMART User's Guide , 1984 .

[17]  W. Cleveland Robust Locally Weighted Regression and Smoothing Scatterplots , 1979 .

[18]  Alan D. Christiansen,et al.  Learning reliable manipulation strategies without initial physical models , 1991, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[19]  Stephen M. Omohundro,et al.  Geometric learning algorithms , 1990 .

[20]  Alok Gupta,et al.  Part description and segmentation using contour, surface, and volumetric primitives , 1989, Other Conferences.

[21]  Jerome H Friedman,et al.  Classification and Multiple Regression through Projection Pursuit , 1985 .

[22]  Christopher G. Atkeson,et al.  Task-level robot learning: juggling a tennis ball more accurately , 1989, Proceedings, 1989 International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[23]  Bartlett W. Mel Connectionist Robot Motion Planning: A Neurally-Inspired Approach to Visually-Guided Reaching , 1990 .

[24]  Christopher G. Atkeson,et al.  Using locally weighted regression for robot learning , 1991, Proceedings. 1991 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.