Abstract
Emerging applications for various types of robots require them to operate autonomously in the vicinity of humans. Ensuring the safety of humans is a permanent requirement that must be upheld at all times. As tasks performed by robots are becoming more complex, adaptive planning components are required. Modern planning approaches do not contribute to a robot system’s safety capabilities, which are thus limited to means like reduction of force and speed or halt of the robot. We argue that during a plan’s execution there should be a backup plan that the robot system can fall back to as an alternative to halting. We present our approach of generating variations of plans by optional exploitation of opportunities, which extend the initially safe plan for extra value when the current safety situation allows it, while maintaining recovery policies to get back to the safe plan in the case of safety-related events.
B. Reiterer—This research was partially funded by the Austrian Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology (BMVIT) within the framework of the sponsorship agreement formed for 2015–2018 under the project CollRob.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Cashmore, M., Fox, M., Long, D., Magazzeni, D., Ridder, B.: Opportunistic planning for increased plan utility. In: Finzi, A., Karpas, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Planning and Robotics at ICAPS 2016, London, UK, pp. 82–92 (2016)
Cashmore, M., Fox, M., Long, D., Magazzeni, D., Ridder, B., Carrera, A., Palomeras, N., Hurtós, N., Carreras, M.: ROSPlan: planning in the robot operating system. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling (ICAPS 2015), Jerusalem, Israel, pp. 333–341. AAAI Press (2015)
Fox, M., Long, D.: PDDL2.1: an extension to PDDL for expressing temporal planning domains. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR) 20, 61–124 (2003)
Gerevini, A.E., Haslum, P., Long, D., Saetti, A., Dimopoulos, Y.: Deterministic planning in the fifth international planning competition: PDDL3 and experimental evaluation of the planners. Artif. Intell. 173(56), 619–668 (2009)
Ginsberg, M.L.: Universal planning: an (almost) universally bad idea. AI Mag. 10(4), 40–44 (1989)
Gough, J., Fox, M., Long, D.: Plan execution under resource consumption uncertainty. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Connecting Planning Theory with Practice at ICAPS 2004, Whistler, Canada, pp. 24–29 (2004)
Hoffmann, J., Edelkamp, S.: The deterministic part of IPC-4: an overview. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR) 24, 519–579 (2005)
Kaelbling, L.P., Littman, M.L., Cassandra, A.R.: Planning and acting in partially observable stochastic domains. Artif. Intell. 101(1), 99–134 (1998)
McDermott, D.V.: The 1998 AI planning systems competition. AI Mag. 21(2), 35–55 (2000)
Pryor, L., Collins, G.: Planning for contingencies: a decision-based approach. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR) 4, 287–339 (1996)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Reiterer, B., Hofbaur, M. (2017). Opportunistic Planning with Recovery for Robot Safety. In: Kern-Isberner, G., Fürnkranz, J., Thimm, M. (eds) KI 2017: Advances in Artificial Intelligence. KI 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10505. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67190-1_31
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67190-1_31
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-67189-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-67190-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)