The Intelligent CoPilot A Constraint-Based Approach to Shared-Adaptive Control of Ground Vehicles

被引:46
作者
Anderson, Sterling J. [1 ]
Karumanchi, Sisir B. [1 ]
Iagnemma, Karl [1 ]
Walker, James M. [2 ]
机构
[1] MIT, Dept Mech Engn, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA
[2] Quantum Signal LLC, Saline, MI USA
关键词
COLLISION-AVOIDANCE; PERCEPTION;
D O I
10.1109/MITS.2013.2247796
中图分类号
TM [电工技术]; TN [电子技术、通信技术];
学科分类号
0808 ; 0809 ;
摘要
This paper presents a new approach to semi-autonomous vehicle hazard avoidance and stability control, based on the design and selective enforcement of constraints. This differs from traditional approaches that rely on the planning and tracking of paths and facilitates "minimally-invasive" control for human-machine systems. Instead of forcing a human operator to follow an automation-determined path, the constraint-based approach identifies safe homotopies, and allows the operator to navigate freely within them, introducing control action only as necessary to ensure that the vehicle does not violate safety constraints. This method evaluates candidate homotopies based on "restrictiveness," rather than traditional measures of path goodness, and designs and enforces requisite constraints on the human's control commands to ensure that the vehicle never leaves the controllable subset of a desired homotopy. This paper demonstrates the approach in simulation and characterizes its effect on human teleoperation of unmanned ground vehicles via a 20-user, 600-trial study on an outdoor obstacle course. Aggregated across all drivers and experiments, the constraint-based control system required an average of 43% of the available control authority to reduce collision frequency by 78% relative to traditional teleoperation, increase average speed by 26%, and moderate operator steering commands by 34%.
引用
收藏
页码:45 / 54
页数:10
相关论文
共 24 条
[1]   A comparison of alternative obstacle avoidance strategies for vehicle control [J].
Alleyne, A .
VEHICLE SYSTEM DYNAMICS, 1997, 27 (5-6) :371-392
[2]   An optimal-control-based framework for trajectory planning, threat assessment, and semi-autonomous control of passenger vehicles in hazard avoidance Scenarios [J].
Anderson S.J. ;
Peters S.C. ;
Pilutti T.E. ;
Iagnemma K. .
International Journal of Vehicle Autonomous Systems, 2010, 8 (2-4) :190-216
[3]  
Biedl T. C., 1999, Algorithms and Computation. 10th International Symposium, ISAAC'99. Proceedings (Lecture Notes in Computer Science Vol.1741), P415
[4]   How UGVs physically fail in the field [J].
Carlson, J ;
Murphy, RR .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ROBOTICS, 2005, 21 (03) :423-437
[5]  
Defense Manpower Data Center, 2012, MIL CAS INF GLOB WAR
[6]  
Dong Kwon Cho, 1991, Proceedings IROS '91. IEEE/RSJ International Workshop on Intelligent Robots and Systems '91. Intelligence for Mechanical Systems (Cat. No.91TH0375-6), P541, DOI 10.1109/IROS.1991.174529
[7]  
Fitts P. M., 1951, Human engineering for an effective air navigation and traffic control system
[8]   The dynamic window approach to collision avoidance [J].
Fox, D ;
Burgard, W ;
Thrun, S .
IEEE ROBOTICS & AUTOMATION MAGAZINE, 1997, 4 (01) :23-33
[9]   A theoretical field-analysis of automobile-driving [J].
Gibson, JJ ;
Crooks, LE .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY, 1938, 51 :453-471
[10]  
Hai-bin Yu, 2007, International Journal of Vehicle Autonomous Systems, V5, P47