The Reactive Paradigm
-
Upload
morgan-hogan -
Category
Documents
-
view
49 -
download
0
description
Transcript of The Reactive Paradigm
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 1
4 The Reactive Paradigm
• Describe the Reactive Paradigm in terms of the 3 robot primitives and its organization of sensing
• List the characteristics of a reactive robotic system, and discuss the connotations of surrounding the reactive paradigm
• Describe the two dominant methods for combining behaviors in a reactive architecture: subsumption and potential field summation
• Be able to program a behavior using pfields
• Be able to construct a new potential field from primitive pfields and sum pfields to generate an emergent behavior
ReviewOrganization-SA-beh. specificSubsumption-Philosophy-Level 0-Level 1-Level 2Summary
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 2
4 Review: Lessons from Biology
• Programs should decompose complex actions into behaviors. Complexity emerges from concurrent behaviors acting independently
• Agents should rely on straightforward activation mechanisms such as IRM
• Perception filters sensing and considers only what is relevant to the task (action-oriented perception)
• Behaviors are independent but the output may be used in many ways including: combined with others to produce a resultant output or to inhibit others
ReviewOrganization-SA-beh. specificSubsumption-Philosophy-Level 0-Level 1-Level 2Summary
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 3
4 Hierarchical Organization is“Horizontal”
ReviewOrganization-SA-beh. specificSubsumption-Philosophy-Level 0-Level 1-Level 2Summary
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 4
4 More Biological is “Vertical”
ReviewOrganization-SA-beh. specificSubsumption-Philosophy-Level 0-Level 1-Level 2Summary
Higher level behaviors reuse or
inhibit more primitive behaviors
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 5
4 Sensing is Behavior-Specific or Local
Behaviors can “share” perception without knowing itThis is behavioral sensor fusion
ReviewOrganization-SA-beh. specificSubsumption-Philosophy-Level 0-Level 1-Level 2Summary
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 6
4 Reactive Robots
• Most apps are programmed with this paradigm
• Biologically based:– Behaviors (independent processes), released by perceptual or internal
events (state)
– No world models or long term memory
– Highly modular, generic
– Overall behavior emerges
SENSE ACT
RELEASERbehavior
OverviewHistoryReactive USARSummary
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 7
4 Example 1: Robomow
• Behaviors?
• Random
• Avoid– Avoid(bump=obstacle)
– Avoid(wire=boundary)
• Stop– Stop(tilt=ON)
• All active www.friendlymachines.com
OverviewHistoryReactive USARSummary
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 8
4 Example 2: My Real Baby
• Behaviors?
• Touch-> Awake
• Upside down & Awake-> Cry
• Awake & Hungry -> Cry
• Awake & Lonely -> Cry
• Note can get crying from multiple behaviors
• Note internal state (countdown timer on Lonely)
www.irobot.com
OverviewHistoryReactive USARSummary
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 9
4 Reactive Behaviors• Connotations
– Execute rapidly • Can be implemented in hardware
– Have no memory • Characteristics of reactive architectures
– Robots are situated agents operating in an ecological niche– Behaviors are basic building blocks for robotic actions, and overall
behavior of robot emerges from their interaction• Independent, concurrent• Schema of a behavior may have a coordinated control program, but there
is no external controller of all behaviors for a task• Architecture may use combination, suppression, or cancellation for
interaction– Only local, behavior-specific sensing in permitted
• No world model, representation from sensing is ego-centric– Modular
• Tasks are broken down into behaviors; behaviors can be tested independently; new behaviors can be built from more primitive ones
– Based on animal models of behavior
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 10
4 Reactive
• Historically, there are two main styles of creating a reactive system– Subsumption architecture
• Layers of behavioral competence
• How to control relationships
– Potential fields• Concurrent behaviors
• How to navigate
• They are equivalent in power
• In practice, see a mixture of both layers and concurrency
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 11
4 Subsumption:Rodney Brooks
From http://www.spe.sony.com/classics/fastcheap/index.html
ReviewOrganization-SA-beh. specificSubsumption-Philosophy-Level 0-Level 1-Level 2Summary
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 12
4 Subsumption Philosophy• Modules should be grouped into
layers of competence
• Modules in a higher lever can override or subsume behaviors in the next lower level
– Suppression: substitute input going to a module
– Inhibit: turn off output from a module
• No internal state in the sense of a local, persistent representation similar to a world model.
• Architecture should be taskable: accomplished by a higher level turning on/off lower layers
ReviewOrganization-SA-beh. specificSubsumption-Philosophy-Level 0-Level 1-Level 2Summary
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 13
4 Level 0: runaway
HALT
COLLIDE
PS MS
RUN AWAYPS MS
runaway 0
wander 1 follow-corridor 2
ReviewOrganization-SA-beh. specificSubsumption-Philosophy-Level 0-Level 1-Level 2Summary
sensors motor actionsbehaviors
when obstacle comes near turn around, run away;when collision imminent, stop, turn around, run away
direction
magnitude
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 14
4 Example Perception: Polar Plot
• Plot is ego-centric
• Plot is distributed (available to whatever wants to use it)
• Although it is a representation in the sense of being a data structure, there is no memory (contains latest information) and no reasoning (2-3 means a “wall”)
ReviewOrganization-SA-beh. specificSubsumption-Philosophy-Level 0-Level 1-Level 2Summary
if sensing is ego-centric, canoften eliminate need for memory, representation
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 15
4 Level 1: Wander
runaway 0
wander 1 follow-corridor 2
ReviewOrganization-SA-beh. specificSubsumption-Philosophy-Level 0-Level 1-Level 2Summary
encoders
AVOID
PS
MS
WANDER
PS MS
Note sharing ofPerception, fusion
Avoid suppresses
(replaces)o
utput from
runawayWhat wouldInhibition do?
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 16
4 Class Exercise
runaway 0
wander 1 move2light 2
LIGHTPHOTO-
TROPHISM
S
ReviewOrganization-SA-beh. specificSubsumption-Philosophy-Level 0-Level 1-Level 2Summary
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 17
4 Level 2: Follow-Corridors
runaway 0
wander 1 follow-corridor 2
STAY-IN-MIDDLE
PS MSReviewOrganization-SA-beh. specificSubsumption-Philosophy-Level 0-Level 1-Level 2Summary
Computed from shaft encoders
Intended course
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 18
4 Class Exercise
• Design the roomba with subsumption
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 19
4 Subsumption Review• What is the Reactive Paradigm in terms of primitives?
– Sense, act• What is the Reactive Paradigm in terms of sensing?
– Local to each behavior• Does the Reactive Paradigm solve the Open World problem?
– Open world is non-monotonic; need truth maintenance mechanism– Reactive paradigm has no memory, no truth maintenance
• How does the Reactive Paradigm eliminate the frame problem?– No world model, so no frame problem
• What is the difference between a behavior and a level of competence?– Not schema theoretic; level of competence groups schema-like
modules into abstract behaviors• What is the difference between suppression and inhibition in
subsumption?– Suppression acts like a gate; inhibition like on/off switch
ReviewOrganization-SA-beh. specificSubsumption-Philosophy-Level 0-Level 1-Level 2Summary
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 20
4 Potential Fields:Ron Arkin
From http://www.cc.gatech.edu/aimosaic/faculty/arkin
From http://www.cc.gatech.edu/aimosaic/robot-lab/MRLhome.html
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 21
4 Potential Fields Philosophy• The motor schema component of a behavior can be
expressed with a potential fields methodology– A potential field can be a “primitive” or constructed from
primitives which are summed together– The output of behaviors are combined using vector summation
• From each behavior, the robot “feels” a vector or force– Magnitude = force, strength of stimulus, or velocity– Direction
• But we visualize the “force” as a field, where every point in space represents the vector that it would feel if it were at that point
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 22
4 Example: Run Away via Repulsion
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 23
4 5 Primitive Potential Fields
uniform
perpendicular
tangential
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 24
4 Draw These Now!Common fields in behaviors
• Uniform– Move in a particular direction, corridor following
• Repulsion– Runaway (obstacle avoidance)
• Attraction– Move to goal
• Perpendicular– Corridor following
• Tangential– Move through door, docking (in combination with other fields)
• random– do you think this is a potential field? what would it look like?
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 25
4 Class Exercise
• Name the field you’d use for – Moving towards a light
– Avoiding obstacles
Attractive
Repulsive
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 26
4 Magnitude profiles
• Constant magnitude
• Linear drop off
• Exponential drop off
• P. 127
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 27
4 Programming a potential field
Example: repulsive field with linear dropoff, only one sensor
• Vdirection = -180 degrees• Vmagnitude = (D-d)/D if d <= D where D is range of potential field
0 otherwise
(magnitude controls velocity)
Implementation in C on p. 129-130
With more than one sensor – fig. =4.18, p. 134 - 136
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 28
4 Problems
• Impact of update rates– if time between updates is too long
• Path can be jerky
• Can overshoot
• Robots can’t change velocity and direction immediately
• Fields may sum to 0
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 29
4 Combining Fields forEmergent Behavior
obstacleobstacle
goal
If robot were dropped anywhere on this grid,it would want to move to goal and avoid obstacle:
Behavior 1: MOVE2GOALBehavior 2: RUNAWAY
The output of each independent behavior is a vector,the 2 vectors is summed to produce emergent behavior
obstacle
goal
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 30
4
Note: In this example, repulsive field only extends for 2 meters;the robot runs away only if obstacle within2 meters
Note: in this example, robot can sense thegoal from 10 meters away
Fields and Their Combination
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 31
4 Path Taken
• If robot started at this location, it would take the following path
• It would only “feel”the vector for the location, then move accordingly, “feel” the next vector, move, etc.
• Pfield visualization allows us to see the vectors at all points, but robot never computes the “field of vectors” just the local vector
Robot only feels vectors for this
point when it (if) reaches that point
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 33
4 Discussion
• Could you represent the Arctic Tern feeding behavior with potential fields?– what happens with multiple red dots?
– can you inhibit with potential fields?
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 34
4 Example: follow-corridor or follow-sidewalk
Perpendicular Uniform
Combined
Note use of Magnitude profiles:Perpendicular decreases
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 35
4 Class Exercise:Draw Fields for Wall-Following(assume that robot stands still if no wall)
Just half of a follow-corridor, but…
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 36
4 But how does the robot see a wall without reasoning or intermediate
representations?
• Perceptual schema “connects the dots”, returns relative orientation
PS:Find-wall
MS: Perp.
MS: UniformS
Sonars
orientation
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 37
4 OK, But why isn’t that a representation of a wall?
• It’s not really reasoning that it’s a wall, rather it is reacting to the stimulus which happens to be smoothed (common in neighboring neurons)
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 38
4 Level 0: Runaway
Note: multiple instances ofa behavior vs. 1:Could just have 1 Instance of RUN AWAY,Which picks nearest reading;Doesn’t matter, but thisAllows addition of anotherSonar without changing theRUN AWAY behavior
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 39
4 Level 1: Wander
Wander isUniform, but
Changes directionaperiodically
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 40
4 Level 2: Follow Corridor
Follow-corridor
Should weLeaveRun AwayIn? Do weNeed it?
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 41
4 Pfields
• Advantages– Easy to visualize
– Easy to build up software libraries
– Fields can be parameterized
– Combination mechanism is fixed, tweaked with gains
• Disadvantages– Local minima problem (sum to magnitude=0)
– Jerky motion
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 42
4 Example: Docking Behavior
•Arkin and Murphy, 1990, Questa, Grossmann, Sandini, 1995, Tse and Luo, 1998, Vandorpe, Xu, Van Brussel, 1995. Roth, Schilling, 1998, Santos-Victor, Sandini, 1997
Orientation, ratio of pixel counts tangent vectorTotal count attraction vector
Selective attraction field ,
width of +-45 degrees
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 43
4 Docking Behavior Video
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 44
4 Class Discussion:When Does a Field End?
• Imagine the case of a “SodaPup” robot (MIT)– task: find and pick up a Coca-Cola can
– environment: red cans are only red object in world
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 45
4 Pfield advantages
• Easy to visualize
• Easy to combine
• Can be parameterized (different ranges, drop off, etc.)
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 46
4 disadvantages
• Local minima– Solutions:
• Add noise
• Navigation templates
• Express potential fields as harmonic functions – no local minima of 0, but computationally expensive
Introduction to AI Robotics (MIT Press) Chapter 4: The Reactive Paradigm 47
4 Pfields Summary• Reactive Paradigm: SA, sensing is local
– Solves the Open World problem by emulating biology
– Eliminates the frame problem by not using any global or persistent representation
– Perception is direct, ego-centric, and distributed
• Two architectural styles are: subsumption and pfields
• Behaviors in pfield methodologies are a tight coupling of sensing to acting; modules are mapped to schemas conceptually
• Potential fields and subsumption are logically equivalent but different implementations
• Pfield problems include– local minima (ways around this)
– jerky motion
– bit of an art