1 / 15

Conflict resolution

Conflict resolution. CS 395 Behavior-Based Robotics. Naïve behavior-based systems. Behavior = policy + trigger System = set of behaviors Assume mutually exclusive triggers Use policy of currently triggered behavior Problem: what happens when triggers aren’t mutually exclusive?.

aileen
Télécharger la présentation

Conflict resolution

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Conflict resolution CS 395 Behavior-Based Robotics

  2. Naïve behavior-based systems • Behavior = policy + trigger • System = set of behaviors • Assume mutually exclusive triggers • Use policy of currently triggered behavior • Problem: what happens when triggers aren’t mutually exclusive?

  3. Types of conflict resolution • Types of activation • Binary: on or off • Graded (numerical): degrees of activation • Types of combination • Switching (choose a behavior) • Blending (form a composite action)

  4. Switched arbitration • Fixed priorities • Give each behavior a priority • Use binary activation • Choose policy of highest priority active behavior • Dynamic priorities • Use graded activation • Choose most active behavior

  5. Arbitration in GRL Arbitration schemes implemented as functions over behaviors • InputA set of behaviors to decide between • OutputA composite behavior with the output of the selected input behavior

  6. Simple switching (Brooks?) (define-signal (behavior-or b1 b2) (behavior (or (activation-level b1) (activation-level b2)) (if (activation-level b1) (motor-vector b1) (motor-vector b2)))) • Assume binary activation and only two behaviors • Operates like or in Scheme or || in C++:Takes the leftmost input that’s “on”.

  7. A cleaverer way to code it (define-signal (behavior-or b1 b2) (if (activation-level b1) b1 b2)) These compile to exactly the same code since: (or a b)is defined to be: (if a a b)

  8. What it looks like as signals b1 or output if b2 Motor vectors Activation levels

  9. More than two behaviors Extra args passed as a list (define-signal (behavior-or first-behavior . rest-of-behaviors) (if (null? rest-of-behaviors) first-behavior (if (activation-level first-behavior) first-behavior (apply behavior-or rest-of-behaviors)))) Notes: • This is a different (and somewhat cleaner) implementation than the one in the notes • The compiler knows to perform the outer if at compile time • There don’t end up being any linked lists at run time. calls a procedure with a list of arguments

  10. Brooks’ suppress operator (define-signal (suppress suppressor suppressee time) (let ((suppressing? (< (true-time (not (activation-level suppressor))) time))) (behavior (or suppressing? (activation-level b2)) (if suppressing? (motor-vector b1) (motor-vector b2)))) • Like behavior-or, but stays with the first argument for a while even after it becomes inactive • Good for removing chatter

  11. Switching with dynamic priorities (Tinbergen) (define-signal (behavior-max . behaviors) (list-ref behaviors (apply arg-max (activation-level behaviors)))) Remember: • Behaviors now have graded activation • Arg-max returns the position of the maximum argument, not its value • List-ref returns the list element with the specified position • Again, the compiler in-lines all of this so there aren’t actually any lists at run time

  12. Computing arg-maxusing lateral inhibition • Biological system often use maximal activation for conflict arbitration using a “winner-take-all network” • Each signal inhibits the other signals • Less active signals inhibit each other less • More active signals are more inhibiting and less inhibited • Eventually, the strongest signal wins, and the others are turned off

  13. Motor schemas (Arbib, Arkin) (define-signal (weighted-motor-vector behavior) ;; Returns behavior’s motor vector ;; with each element multiplied by the behavior’s activation-level (* (activation-level behavior) (motor-vector behavior))) (define-signal (weighted-sum . behaviors) (apply + weighted-motor-vector behaviors)) (define-signal (behavior-+ . behaviors) (behavior (apply + (activation-level behaviors)) (apply weighted-sum behaviors)))

  14. Weighted voting (Rosenblatt/CMU) • Principle of least commitment • Don’t make decisions until you have to • Least commitment arbitration • Assume behaviors don’t return a single motor vector, but rather a set of preferences on possible motor vectors • Sum everyone’s preferences • Pick the vector with the most preference

  15. Weighted voting for directions (define-signal avoid-obstacles sonar-readings)(define-signal go-forward (angle-preferences cos))(define-signal angle-preferences (+ avoid-obstacles go-forward))(define-signal motor-vector (follow-xy-vector (unit-vector (* (vector-arg-max angle-preferences) radians-per-angle-sample)))) Notes • Behaviors are now vectors of numbers of rating each of 16 different directions to move in • Angle-preferences takes a function from angles to numbers and returns a vector of 16 samples of the function

More Related