1 / 41

Sampling and Connection Strategies for PRM Planners

Sampling and Connection Strategies for PRM Planners. Jean-Claude Latombe Computer Science Department Stanford University. q. 2. q. q. q. q. q. t (s). 0. 1. n. 3. 4. Original Problem. The “Solution”: Probabilistic Roadmap (PRM). free space. local path. milestone. m g. m b.

jillian
Télécharger la présentation

Sampling and Connection Strategies for PRM Planners

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. Sampling and Connection Strategiesfor PRM Planners Jean-Claude Latombe Computer Science Department Stanford University

  2. q 2 q q q q q t(s) 0 1 n 3 4 Original Problem

  3. The “Solution”: Probabilistic Roadmap (PRM) free space

  4. local path milestone mg mb The “Solution”:Probabilistic Roadmap (PRM) free space

  5. The New Issues • Where to sample new milestones? Sampling strategy • Which milestones to connect? Connection strategy

  6. Examples • Two-stage sampling: • Build initial roadmap with uniform sampling • Perform additional sampling around poorly connected milestones • Coarse Connection: • Maintain roadmap’s connected components • Attempt connection between 2 milestones only if they are in two distinct components

  7. Multi-Query PRM

  8. mg mb Single-Query PRM

  9. Multi-Query PRM • Multi-stage sampling • Obstacle-sensitive sampling • Narrow-passage sampling

  10. Multi-Stage Strategies Rationale: One can use intermediate sampling results to identify regions of the free space whose connectivity is more difficult to capture

  11. Two-Stage Sampling [Kavraki, 94]

  12. Two-Stage Sampling [Kavraki, 94]

  13. Obstacle-Sensitive Strategies Rationale: The connectivity of free space is more difficult to capture near its boundary than in wide-open area

  14. Obstacle-Sensitive Strategies • Ray casting from samples in obstacles • Gaussian sampling [Amato, Overmars] [Boor, Overmars, van der Stappen, 99]

  15. Multi-Query PRM • Multi-stage sampling • Obstacle-sensitive sampling • Narrow-passage sampling

  16. Narrow-Passage Strategies Rationale: Finding the connectivity of the free space through narrow passage is the only hard problem.

  17. Narrow-Passage Strategies • Medial-Axis Bias • Dilatation/contraction of the free space • Bridge test [Amato, Kavraki] [Baginski, 96; Hsu et al, 98] [Hsu et al, 02]

  18. Bridge Test

  19. Comparison with Gaussian Strategy Bridge test Gaussian

  20. Other Examples

  21. Running Times

  22. Comments (JCL) • The bridge test most likely yields a high rejection rate of configurations • But, in general it results in a much smaller number of milestones, hence much fewer connections to be tested • Since testing connections is costly, there can be significant computational gain • More on this later ….

  23. mg mb Single-Query PRM • Diffusion • Adaptive step • Biased sampling • Control-based sampling

  24. Diffusion Strategies Rationale: The trees of milestones should diffuse throughout the free space to guarantee that the planner will find a path with high probability, if one exists

  25. Diffusion Strategies • Density-based strategy • Associate a sampling density to each milestone in the trees • Pick a milestone m at random with probability inverse to density • Expand from m • RRT strategy • Pick a configuration q uniformly at random in c-space • Select the milestone m the closest from q • Expand from m [Hsu et al, 97] [LaValle and Kuffner, 00]

  26. Adaptive-Step Strategies Rationale: Makes big steps in wide-open area of the free space, and smaller steps in cluttered areas.

  27. Adaptive-Step Strategies • Shrinking-window strategy mg mb [Sanchez-Ante, 02]

  28. mg mb Single-Query PRM • Diffusion • Adaptive step • Biased sampling • Control-based sampling

  29. Biased Strategies Rationale: Use heuristic knowledge extracted from the workspace Example: • Define a potential field U and bias tree growth along the steepest descent of U • Use task knowledge

  30. Biased Strategies Rationale: Use heuristic knowledge extracted from the workspace Example: • Define a potential field U and bias tree growth along the steepest descent of U • Use task knowledge

  31. Control-Based Strategies Rationale: Directly satisfy differential kinodynamic constraints Method: • Represent motion in state (configuration x velocity) space • Pick control input at random • Integrate motion over short interval of time [Kindel, Hsu, et al, 00] [LaValle and Kuffner, 00]

  32. The New Issues • Where to sample new milestones? Sampling strategy • Which milestones to connect? Connection strategy

  33. Connection Strategies • Multi-query PRMs Coarse connections • Single-query PRMs Lazy collision checking

  34. Coarse Connections Rationale: Since connections are expensive to test, pick only those which have a good chance to test collision-free and to contribute to the roadmap connectivity.

  35. Coarse Connnections Methods: • Connect only pairs of milestones that are not too far apart • Connect each milestone to at most k other milestones • Connect two milestones only if they are in two distinct components of the current roadmap ( the roadmap is a collection of acyclic graph) • Visibility-based roadmap: Keep a new milestone m if: • m cannot be connected to any previous milestone and • m can be connected to 2 previous milestones belonging to distinct components of the roadmap [Laumond and Simeon, 01]

  36. Connection Strategies • Multi-query PRMs  Coarse connections • Single-query PRMs Lazy collision checking

  37. Lazy Collision Checking Rationale: • Connections between close milestones have high probability of being collision-free • Most of the time spent in collision checking is done to test connections • Most collision-free connections will not be part of the final path • Testing connections is more expensive for collision-free connections • Hence: Postpone the tests of connections until they are absolutely needed

  38. mg mb Lazy Collision Checking X [Sanchez-Ante, 02]

  39. mg mb Lazy Collision Checking [Sanchez-Ante, 02]

  40. Possible New Strategy • Rationale: • Single-query planners are often more suitable than multi-query’s • But there are some very good multi-query strategies • Milestones are much less expensive to create than connections • Pre-compute the milestonesof the roadmap, with uniform sampling, two-stage sampling, bridge test, and dilatation/contraction of free space to place milestones well • Process queries with single-query roadmaps restricted to pre-computed milestones, with lazy collision checking

  41. vi Pij vj Application to Probabilistic Conformational Roadmap

More Related