FR

EN

Homepage Inria website
  • Inria login
  • The Inria's Research Teams produce an annual Activity Report presenting their activities and their results of the year. These reports include the team members, the scientific program, the software developed by the team and the new results of the year. The report also describes the grants, contracts and the activities of dissemination and teaching. Finally, the report gives the list of publications of the year.

  • Legal notice
  • Cookie management
  • Personal data
  • Cookies


Section: Research Program

Lifelong Autonomy

Scientific Context

So far, only a few autonomous robots have been deployed for a long time (weeks, months, or years) outside of factories and laboratories. They are mostly mobile robots that simply “move around” (e.g., vacuum cleaners or museum “guides”) and data collecting robots (e.g., boats or underwater “gliders” that collect data about the water of the ocean).

A large part of the long-term autonomy community is focused on simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM), with a recent emphasis on changing and outdoor environments [34], [42]. A more recent theme is life-long learning: during long-term deployment, we cannot hope to equip robots with everything they need to know, therefore some things will have to be learned along the way. Most of the work on this topic leverages machine learning and/or evolutionary algorithms to improve the ability of robots to react to unforeseen changes [34], [40].

Main Challenges

The first major challenge is to endow robots with a stable situation awareness in open and dynamic environments. This covers both the state estimation of the robot itself as well as the perception/representation of the environment. Both problems have been claimed to be solved but it is only the case for static environments [39].

In the Larsen team, we aim at deployment in environments shared with humans which imply dynamic objects that degrade both the mapping and localization of a robot, especially in cluttered spaces. Moreover, when robots stay longer in the environment than for the acquisition of a snapshot map, they have to face structural changes, such as the displacement of a piece of furniture or the opening or closing of a door. The current approach is to simply update an implicitly static map with all observations with no attempt at distinguishing the suitable changes. For localization in not-too-cluttered or not-too-empty environments, this is generally sufficient as a significant fraction of the environment should remain stable. But for life-long autonomy, and in particular navigation, the quality of the map, and especially the knowledge of the stable parts, is primordial.

A second major obstacle to move robots outside of labs and factories is their fragility: Current robots often break in a few hours, if not a few minutes. This fragility mainly stems from the overall complexity of robotic systems, which involve many actuators, many sensors, and complex decisions, and from the diversity of situations that robots can encounter. Low-cost robots exacerbate this issue because they can be broken in many ways (high-quality material is expensive), because they have low self-sensing abilities (sensors are expensive and increase the overall complexity), and because they are typically targeted towards non-controlled environments (e.g., houses rather than factories, in which robots are protected from most unexpected events). More generally, this fragility is a symptom of the lack of adaptive abilities in current robots.

Angle of Attack

To solve the state estimation problem, our approach is to combine classical estimation filters (Extended Kalman Filters, Unscented Kalman Filters, or particle filters) with a Bayesian reasoning model in order to internally simulate various configurations of the robot in its environment. This should allow for adaptive estimation that can be used as one aspect of long-term adaptation. To handle dynamic and structural changes in an environment, we aim at assessing, for each piece of observation, whether it is static or not.

We also plan to address active sensing to improve the situation awareness of robots. Literally, active sensing is the ability of an interacting agent to act so as to control what it senses from its environment with the typical objective of acquiring information about this environment. A formalism for representing and solving active sensing problems has already been proposed by members of the team [33] and we aim to use this to formalize decision making problems of improving situation awareness.

Situation awareness of robots can also be tackled by cooperation, whether it be between robots or between robots and sensors in the environment (led out intelligent spaces) or between robots and humans. This is in rupture with classical robotics, in which robots are conceived as self-contained. But, in order to cope with as diverse environments as possible, these classical robots use precise, expensive, and specialized sensors, whose cost prohibits their use in large-scale deployments for service or assistance applications. Furthermore, when all sensors are on the robot, they share the same point of view on the environment, which is a limit for perception. Therefore, we propose to complement a cheaper robot with sensors distributed in a target environment. This is an emerging research direction that shares some of the problematics of multi-robot operation and we are therefore collaborating with other teams at Inria that address the issue of communication and interoperability.

To address the fragility problem, the traditional approach is to first diagnose the situation, then use a planning algorithm to create/select a contingency plan. But, again, this calls for both expensive sensors on the robot for the diagnosis and extensive work to predict and plan for all the possible faults that, in an open and dynamic environment, are almost infinite. An alternative approach is then to skip the diagnosis and let the robot discover by trial and error a behavior that works in spite of the damage with a reinforcement learning algorithm [48], [40]. However, current reinforcement learning algorithms require hundreds of trials/episodes to learn a single, often simplified, task [40], which makes them impossible to use for real robots and more ambitious tasks. We therefore need to design new trial-and-error algorithms that will allow robots to learn with a much smaller number of trials (typically, a dozen). We think the key idea is to guide online learning on the physical robot with dynamic simulations. For instance, in our recent work, we successfully mixed evolutionary search in simulation, physical tests on the robot, and machine learning to allow a robot to recover from physical damage [41], [1].

A final approach to address fragility is to deploy several robots or a swarm of robots or to make robots evolve in an active environment. We will consider several paradigms such as (1) those inspired from collective natural phenomena in which the environment plays an active role for coordinating the activity of a huge number of biological entities such as ants and (2) those based on online learning [38]. We envision to transfer our knowledge of such phenomenon to engineer new artificial devices such as an intelligent floor (which is in fact a spatially distributed network in which each node can sense, compute and communicate with contiguous nodes and can interact with moving entities on top of it) in order to assist people and robots (see the principle in [46], [38], [32]).