-
Collision Cone Control Barrier Functions: Experimental Validation on UGVs for Kinematic Obstacle Avoidance
Authors:
Bhavya Giri Goswami,
Manan Tayal,
Karthik Rajgopal,
Pushpak Jagtap,
Shishir Kolathaya
Abstract:
Autonomy advances have enabled robots in diverse environments and close human interaction, necessitating controllers with formal safety guarantees. This paper introduces an experimental platform designed for the validation and demonstration of a novel class of Control Barrier Functions (CBFs) tailored for Unmanned Ground Vehicles (UGVs) to proactively prevent collisions with kinematic obstacles by…
▽ More
Autonomy advances have enabled robots in diverse environments and close human interaction, necessitating controllers with formal safety guarantees. This paper introduces an experimental platform designed for the validation and demonstration of a novel class of Control Barrier Functions (CBFs) tailored for Unmanned Ground Vehicles (UGVs) to proactively prevent collisions with kinematic obstacles by integrating the concept of collision cones. While existing CBF formulations excel with static obstacles, extensions to torque/acceleration-controlled unicycle and bicycle models have seen limited success. Conventional CBF applications in nonholonomic UGV models have demonstrated control conservatism, particularly in scenarios where steering/thrust control was deemed infeasible. Drawing inspiration from collision cones in path planning, we present a pioneering CBF formulation ensuring theoretical safety guarantees for both unicycle and bicycle models. The core premise revolves around aligning the obstacle's velocity away from the vehicle, establishing a constraint to perpetually avoid vectors directed towards it. This control methodology is rigorously validated through simulations and experimental verification on the Copernicus mobile robot (Unicycle Model) and FOCAS-Car (Bicycle Model).
△ Less
Submitted 16 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
A Theoretical and Empirical Study on the Convergence of Adam with an "Exact" Constant Step Size in Non-Convex Settings
Authors:
Alokendu Mazumder,
Rishabh Sabharwal,
Manan Tayal,
Bhartendu Kumar,
Punit Rathore
Abstract:
In neural network training, RMSProp and Adam remain widely favoured optimisation algorithms. One of the keys to their performance lies in selecting the correct step size, which can significantly influence their effectiveness. Additionally, questions about their theoretical convergence properties continue to be a subject of interest. In this paper, we theoretically analyse a constant step size vers…
▽ More
In neural network training, RMSProp and Adam remain widely favoured optimisation algorithms. One of the keys to their performance lies in selecting the correct step size, which can significantly influence their effectiveness. Additionally, questions about their theoretical convergence properties continue to be a subject of interest. In this paper, we theoretically analyse a constant step size version of Adam in the non-convex setting and discuss why it is important for the convergence of Adam to use a fixed step size. This work demonstrates the derivation and effective implementation of a constant step size for Adam, offering insights into its performance and efficiency in non convex optimisation scenarios. (i) First, we provide proof that these adaptive gradient algorithms are guaranteed to reach criticality for smooth non-convex objectives with constant step size, and we give bounds on the running time. Both deterministic and stochastic versions of Adam are analysed in this paper. We show sufficient conditions for the derived constant step size to achieve asymptotic convergence of the gradients to zero with minimal assumptions. Next, (ii) we design experiments to empirically study Adam's convergence with our proposed constant step size against stateof the art step size schedulers on classification tasks. Lastly, (iii) we also demonstrate that our derived constant step size has better abilities in reducing the gradient norms, and empirically, we show that despite the accumulation of a few past gradients, the key driver for convergence in Adam is the non-increasing step sizes.
△ Less
Submitted 3 April, 2024; v1 submitted 15 September, 2023;
originally announced September 2023.
-
Control Barrier Functions in UGVs for Kinematic Obstacle Avoidance: A Collision Cone Approach
Authors:
Phani Thontepu,
Bhavya Giri Goswami,
Manan Tayal,
Neelaksh Singh,
Shyamsundar P I,
Shyam Sundar M G,
Suresh Sundaram,
Vaibhav Katewa,
Shishir Kolathaya
Abstract:
In this paper, we propose a new class of Control Barrier Functions (CBFs) for Unmanned Ground Vehicles (UGVs) that help avoid collisions with kinematic (non-zero velocity) obstacles. While the current forms of CBFs have been successful in guaranteeing safety/collision avoidance with static obstacles, extensions for the dynamic case have seen limited success. Moreover, with the UGV models like the…
▽ More
In this paper, we propose a new class of Control Barrier Functions (CBFs) for Unmanned Ground Vehicles (UGVs) that help avoid collisions with kinematic (non-zero velocity) obstacles. While the current forms of CBFs have been successful in guaranteeing safety/collision avoidance with static obstacles, extensions for the dynamic case have seen limited success. Moreover, with the UGV models like the unicycle or the bicycle, applications of existing CBFs have been conservative in terms of control, i.e., steering/thrust control has not been possible under certain scenarios. Drawing inspiration from the classical use of collision cones for obstacle avoidance in trajectory planning, we introduce its novel CBF formulation with theoretical guarantees on safety for both the unicycle and bicycle models. The main idea is to ensure that the velocity of the obstacle w.r.t. the vehicle is always pointing away from the vehicle. Accordingly, we construct a constraint that ensures that the velocity vector always avoids a cone of vectors pointing at the vehicle. The efficacy of this new control methodology is later verified by Pybullet simulations on TurtleBot3 and F1Tenth.
△ Less
Submitted 16 October, 2023; v1 submitted 23 September, 2022;
originally announced September 2022.
