4.1 Article

Primitive Action Based Combined Task and Motion Planning for the Service Robot

期刊

FRONTIERS IN ROBOTICS AND AI
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/frobt.2022.713470

关键词

service robots; PDDL planning; task planning; motion planning; object manipulation

类别

资金

  1. Technology Innovation Program (or the Industrial Strategic Technology Development Program) - Ministry of Trade, Industry, and Energy (MOTIE, Korea) [10077538]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The need for combined task and motion planning (CTAMP) in robotics is well known as robotic technologies become more mature. We propose a CTAMP system that combines symbolic action sequence generation in task planning and geometric verification in motion planning. This approach successfully responds to changes in the environment and uncertainty in recognition of the environment and the robot motion control.
The need for combined task and motion planning (CTAMP) in robotics is well known as robotic technologies become more mature. The goal of CTAMP is to determine a proper sequence of a robot's actions based on symbolic and geometric reasoning. Because of the fundamental difference in symbolic and geometric reasoning, a CTAMP system often requires an interface module between the two reasoning modules. We propose a CTAMP system in which a symbolic action sequence is generated in task planning, and each action is verified geometrically in motion planning using the off-the-shelf planners and reasoners. The approach is that a set of action models is defined with PDDL in the interface module (action library) and the required information to each planner is automatically provided by the interface module. The proposed method was successfully implemented in three simulated experiments that involve manipulation tasks. According to our findings, the proposed method is effective in responding to changes in the environment and uncertainty with errors in recognition of the environment and the robot motion control.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据