Minimum-violation LTL planning with conflicting specifications

We consider the problem of automatic generation of control strategies for robotic vehicles given a set of high-level mission specifications, such as “Vehicle x must eventually visit a target region and then return to a base,” “Regions A and B must be periodically surveyed,” or “None of the vehicles can enter an unsafe region.” We focus on instances when all of the given specifications cannot be reached simultaneously due to their incompatibility and/or environmental constraints. We aim to find the least-violating control strategy while considering different priorities of satisfying different parts of the mission. Formally, we consider the missions given in the form of linear temporal logic formulas, each of which is assigned a reward that is earned when the formula is satisfied. Leveraging ideas from the automata-based model checking, we propose an algorithm for finding an optimal control strategy that maximizes the sum of rewards earned if this control strategy is applied. We demonstrate the proposed algorithm on an illustrative case study.

[1]  Emilio Frazzoli,et al.  Sampling-based algorithms for optimal motion planning with deterministic μ-calculus specifications , 2012, 2012 American Control Conference (ACC).

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

[3]  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..

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

[5]  Gerard J. Holzmann,et al.  The SPIN Model Checker - primer and reference manual , 2003 .

[6]  Hadas Kress-Gazit,et al.  Automated feedback for unachievable high-level robot behaviors , 2012, 2012 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[7]  C. R. Ramakrishnan,et al.  Model Repair for Probabilistic Systems , 2011, TACAS.

[8]  Bernd Finkbeiner,et al.  Does It Pay to Extend the Perimeter of a World Model? , 2011, FM.

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

[10]  Hadas Kress-Gazit,et al.  Analyzing Unsynthesizable Specifications for High-Level Robot Behavior Using LTLMoP , 2011, CAV.

[11]  Lydia E. Kavraki,et al.  Sampling-based motion planning with temporal goals , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[12]  Kris K. Hauser,et al.  The minimum constraint removal problem with three robotics applications , 2014, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[13]  Paul Gastin,et al.  Fast LTL to Büchi Automata Translation , 2001, CAV.

[14]  Georg Gottlob,et al.  Enhancing Model Checking in Verification by AI Techniques , 1999, Artif. Intell..

[15]  Calin Belta,et al.  Motion planning and control from temporal logic specifications with probabilistic satisfaction guarantees , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

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

[17]  Viktor Schuppan,et al.  Diagnostic Information for Realizability , 2008, VMCAI.

[18]  Sriram Sankaranarayanan,et al.  On the revision problem of specification automata , 2012, 2012 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[19]  Calin Belta,et al.  A Fully Automated Framework for Control of Linear Systems from Temporal Logic Specifications , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[20]  Georgios E. Fainekos,et al.  Revising temporal logic specifications for motion planning , 2011, 2011 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[21]  Ufuk Topcu,et al.  Receding horizon temporal logic planning for dynamical systems , 2009, Proceedings of the 48h IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC) held jointly with 2009 28th Chinese Control Conference.

[22]  Emilio Frazzoli,et al.  Sampling-based motion planning with deterministic μ-calculus specifications , 2009, Proceedings of the 48h IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC) held jointly with 2009 28th Chinese Control Conference.