Crossing the Reality Gap: a Short Introduction to the Transferability Approach

In robotics, gradient-free optimization algorithms (e.g. evolutionary algorithms) are often used only in simulation because they require the evaluation of many candidate solutions. Nevertheless, solutions obtained in simulation often do not work well on the real device. The transferability approach aims at crossing this gap between simulation and reality by making the optimization algorithm aware of the limits of the simulation. In the present paper, we first describe the transferability function, that maps solution descriptors to a score representing how well a simulator matches the reality. We then show that this function can be learned using a regression algorithm and a few experiments with the real devices. Our results are sup- ported by an extensive study of the reality gap for a simple quadruped robot whose control parameters are optimized. In particular, we mapped the whole search space in reality and in simulation to understand the differences between the fitness landscapes.

[1]  Rolf Pfeifer,et al.  How the Body Shapes the Way We Think: A New View of Intelligence (Bradford Books) , 2006 .

[2]  Stéphane Doncieux,et al.  The Transferability Approach: Crossing the Reality Gap in Evolutionary Robotics , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[3]  Stéphane Doncieux,et al.  How to promote generalisation in evolutionary robotics: the ProGAb approach , 2011, GECCO '11.

[4]  Javier Ruiz-del-Solar,et al.  Combining Simulation and Reality in Evolutionary Robotics , 2007, J. Intell. Robotic Syst..

[5]  Nick Jakobi,et al.  Evolutionary Robotics and the Radical Envelope-of-Noise Hypothesis , 1997, Adapt. Behav..

[6]  J.D. Lohn,et al.  Evolvable hardware using evolutionary computation to design and optimize hardware systems , 2006, IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine.

[7]  Vincent Padois,et al.  Evolutionary Robotics: Exploring New Horizons , 2011 .

[8]  Thomas Bräunl,et al.  Evaluation of real-time physics simulation systems , 2007, GRAPHITE '07.

[9]  Phil Husbands,et al.  Evolutionary robotics , 2014, Evolutionary Intelligence.

[10]  Yaochu Jin,et al.  A comprehensive survey of fitness approximation in evolutionary computation , 2005, Soft Comput..

[11]  W. Oechel,et al.  Automatic design and manufacture of robotic lifeforms , 2022 .

[12]  Hod Lipson,et al.  Resilient Machines Through Continuous Self-Modeling , 2006, Science.

[13]  Kenneth O. Stanley,et al.  Abandoning Objectives: Evolution Through the Search for Novelty Alone , 2011, Evolutionary Computation.

[14]  D. Shepard A two-dimensional interpolation function for irregularly-spaced data , 1968, ACM National Conference.

[15]  Peter J. Fleming,et al.  Multiobjective optimization and multiple constraint handling with evolutionary algorithms. I. A unified formulation , 1998, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[16]  Christian Igel,et al.  Evolution Strategies for Direct Policy Search , 2008, PPSN.

[17]  Gregory J. Barlow,et al.  Article in Press Robotics and Autonomous Systems ( ) – Robotics and Autonomous Systems Fitness Functions in Evolutionary Robotics: a Survey and Analysis , 2022 .

[18]  A. Boeing,et al.  Evaluation of real-time physics simulations systems , 2007 .

[19]  Sylvain Koos,et al.  ONLINE DISCOVERY OF LOCOMOTION MODES FOR WHEEL-LEGGED HYBRID ROBOTS: A TRANSFERABILITY-BASED APPROACH , 2011 .

[20]  L. Buşoniu Evolutionary function approximation for reinforcement learning , 2006 .