Using Constrained Intuitionistic Linear Logic for Hybrid Robotic Planning Problems

Synthesis of robot behaviors towards nontrivial goals often requires reasoning about both discrete and continuous aspects of the underlying domain. Existing approaches in building automated tools for such synthesis problems attempt to augment methods from either discrete planning or continuous control with hybrid elements, but largely fail to ensure a uniform treatment of both aspects of the domain. In this paper, we present a new formalism, constrained intuitionistic linear logic (CILL), merging continuous constraint solvers with linear logic to yield a single language in which hybrid properties of robotic behaviors can be expressed and reasoned with. Following a gentle introduction to linear logic, we describe the two new connectives of CILL, introduced to interface the constraint domain with the logical fragment of the language. We then illustrate the application of CILL for robotic planning problems within the balanced blocks world, a "physically realistic" extension of the blocks world domain. Even though some of the formal proofs for the semantic foundations of the language as well as an efficient implementation of a theorem prover are yet to be completed, CILL promises to be a powerful formalism in reasoning within hybrid domains.

[1]  G. G. Stokes "J." , 1890, The New Yale Book of Quotations.

[2]  Daniel E. Koditschek,et al.  Exact robot navigation using artificial potential functions , 1992, IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom..

[3]  Daniel E. Koditschek,et al.  Sequential Composition of Dynamically Dexterous Robot Behaviors , 1999, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[4]  Hadas Kress-Gazit,et al.  Temporal Logic Motion Planning for Mobile Robots , 2005, Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[5]  Jean-Yves Girard,et al.  Linear logic: its syntax and semantics , 1995 .

[6]  Steven M. LaValle,et al.  Planning algorithms , 2006 .

[7]  David Walker,et al.  ILC: A Foundation for Automated Reasoning About Pointer Programs , 2006, ESOP.

[8]  John McCarthy,et al.  SOME PHILOSOPHICAL PROBLEMS FROM THE STANDPOINT OF ARTI CIAL INTELLIGENCE , 1987 .

[9]  Howie Choset,et al.  Construction and automated deployment of local potential functions for global robot control and navigation , 2003 .

[10]  Marco Bozzano,et al.  A Logic-Based Approach to Model Checking of Parameterized and Infinite-State Systems , 2002 .

[11]  Tara Estlin,et al.  The CLARAty architecture for robotic autonomy , 2001, 2001 IEEE Aerospace Conference Proceedings (Cat. No.01TH8542).

[12]  Frank Pfenning,et al.  A Focusing Inverse Method Theorem Prover for First-Order Linear Logic , 2005, CADE.

[13]  John K. Slaney,et al.  Blocks World revisited , 2001, Artif. Intell..

[14]  A. Nerode,et al.  Logics for hybrid systems , 2000, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[15]  Peter Norvig,et al.  Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach , 1995 .

[16]  Richard Fikes,et al.  STRIPS: A New Approach to the Application of Theorem Proving to Problem Solving , 1971, IJCAI.

[17]  Frank Pfenning Structural Cut Elimination in Linear Logic. , 1994 .

[18]  G. Gentzen Untersuchungen über das logische Schließen. I , 1935 .

[19]  Derek C. Oppen,et al.  Complexity, Convexity and Combinations of Theories , 1980, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[20]  George J. Pappas,et al.  Discrete abstractions of hybrid systems , 2000, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[21]  P. Martin-Lof,et al.  ON THE MEANINGS OF THE LOGICAL CONSTANTS AND THE JUSTIFICATIONS OF THE LOGICAL LAWS(Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics) , 1986 .

[22]  Stephan Merz,et al.  Model Checking , 2000 .

[23]  Bor-Yuh Evan Chang,et al.  A judgmental analysis of linear logic , 2003 .