Abstract
A testbed has recently been introduced that evolves controllers for arbitrary hover-capable UAVs, with evaluations occurring directly on the robot. To prepare the testbed for real-world deployment, we investigate the effects of state-space limitations brought about by physical tethering (which prevents damage to the UAV during stochastic tuning), on the generality of the evolved controllers. We identify generalisation issues in some controllers, and propose an improved method that comprises two stages: in the first stage, controllers are evolved as normal using standard tethers, but experiments are terminated when the population displays basic flight competency. Optimisation then continues on a much less restrictive tether, effectively free-flying, and is allowed to explore a larger state-space envelope. We compare the two methods on a hover task using a real UAV, and show that more general solutions are generated in fewer generations using the two-stage approach. A secondary experiment undertakes a sensitivity analysis of the evolved controllers.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Herein we use ’UAV’ to refer to any hover-capable multirotor, with an airframe size \(<800\) mm
Typical causes include, e.g., the tracking LED being obscured, or data link errors.
Selected to balance search stability and convergence times following a parameter sweep.
This latter criterion prevents the UAV from cheating by using the tether to ’balance’ itself.
when flying close the the floor, the ground deflects a propellers airflow, causing increased thrust nearer the ground for the same power input
> 4 in certain circumstances [26]
References
Acar E, Zhang Y, Choset H, Schervish M, Costa AG, Melamud R, Lean D, Graveline A (2001) Path planning for robotic demining and development of a test platform. Int Conferen Field Serv Robot 1:161–168
Biswas A, Das S, Abraham A, Dasgupta S (2009) Design of fractional-order pi \(\lambda \) d \(\mu \) controllers with an improved differential evolution. Eng Appl Artif Intell 22(2):343–350
Chiha I, Ghabi J, Liouane N (2012) Tuning pid controller with multi-objective differential evolution. In: 2012 5th international symposium on communications control and signal processing (ISCCSP), pp 1–4
De Nardi R, Togelius J, Holland O, Lucas S (2006) Evolution of neural networks for helicopter control: why modularity matters. In: IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, 2006—CEC 2006, pp 1799–1806
Degrave J, Burm M, Kindermans PJ, Dambre J, wyffels F (2015) Transfer learning of gaits on a quadrupedal robot. Adapt Behav 23(2):69–82
Eiben AE, Smith JE (2003) Introduction to evolutionary computing. Springer, Berlin
Faina AJ, Toft L, Risi S (2017) Automating the incremental evolution of controllers for physical robots. Artif Life 23(2):142–168
Floreano D, Zufferey JC, Nicoud JD (2005) From wheels to wings with evolutionary spiking circuits. Artif life 11(1-2):121–138
Ghiglino P, Forshaw JL, Lappas VJ (2015) Online evolutionary swarm algorithm for self-tuning unmanned flight control laws. J. Guid. Control Dyn. 38(4):772–782
Gongora M, Passow B, Hopgood A (2009) Robustness analysis of evolutionary controller tuning using real systems. In: IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, 2009. CEC ’09, pp 606–613
Harvey I, Husbands P, Cliff D (1994) Seeing the light: artificial evolution, real vision. School of Cognitive and Computing Sciences, University of Sussex Falmer
Heijnen H, Howard D, Kottege N (2017) A testbed that evolved hexapod controllers in hardware. In: 2017 IEEE/RSJ international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA), IEEE (in press)
Holland OE, Nardi RD (2008) Coevolutionary modelling of a miniature rotorcraft. In: Burgard W, Dillmann R, Plagemann C, Vahrenkamp N (eds) Intelligent autonomous systems 10 (IAS10). Univ Freiburg, Autonomous Intelligent Syst Lab, Baden Baden, Germany (loc)
How JP, BEHIHKE B, Frank A, Dale D, Vian J (2008) Real-time indoor autonomous vehicle test environment. IEEE Control Syst 28(2):51–64
Howard D (2017) A platform that directly evolves multirotor controllers. IEEE Trans Evolut Comput 21(6):943–955
Howard D, Elfes A (2014) Evolving spiking networks for turbulence-tolerant quadrotor control. In: International conference on artificial life (ALIFE14), pp 431–438
Howard D, Merz T (2015) A platform for the direct hardware evolution of quadcopter controllers. In: 2015 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS). IEEE, pp 4614–4619
Howard GD (2017) On self-adaptive mutation restarts for evolutionary robotics with real rotorcraft. In: Proceedings of the 17th annual conference on genetic and evolutionary computation. ACM (in press)
Jakobi N, Husbands P, Harvey I (1995) Noise and the reality gap: The use of simulation in evolutionary robotics. In: Morán F, Moreno A, Merelo JJ, Chacón P (eds) Advances in artificial life. ECAL 1995. Lecture notes in computer science (Lecture notes in artificial intelligence), vol 929. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Johnson W (2012) Helicopter theory. Courier Corporation, Chelmsford
Koos S, Mouret JB, Doncieux S (2010) Crossing the reality gap in evolutionary robotics by promoting transferable controllers. In: Proceedings of the 12th annual conference on genetic and evolutionary computation, GECCO ’10. ACM, New York, pp 119–126
Koppejan R, Whiteson S (2009) Neuroevolutionary reinforcement learning for generalized helicopter control. In: Proceedings of the 11th annual conference on genetic and evolutionary computation, GECCO ’09. ACM, New York, NY, pp 145–152
Merz T, Rudol P, Wzorek M (2006) Control system framework for autonomous robots based on extended state machines. In: 2006 International conference on autonomic and autonomous systems, 2006. ICAS’06. IEEE, pp 14–14
Moravec J, Pošík P (2014) A comparative study: the effect of the perturbation vector type in the differential evolution algorithm on the accuracy of robot pose and heading estimation. Evolut. Intell. 6(3):171–191. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12065-013-0090-2
Nishiwaki K, Sugihara T, Kagami S, Kanehiro F, Inaba M, Inoue H (2000) Design and development of research platform for perception-action integration in humanoid robot: H6. In: Proceedings of 2000 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems 2000, (IROS 2000). IEEE, vol 3, pp 1559–1564
Powers C, Mellinger D, Kushleyev A, Kothmann B, Kumar V (2013) Influence of aerodynamics and proximity effects in quadrotor flight. In: Desai J, Dudek G, Khatib O, Kumar V (eds) Experimental robotics. Springer tracts in advanced robotics, vol 88. Springer, Heidelberg
Rechenberg I (1973) Evolutionsstrategie: optimierung technischer systeme nach prinzipien der biologischen evolution. Frommann-Holzboog, Stuttgart
Rossi C, Eiben AE (2014) Simultaneous versus incremental learning of multiple skills by modular robots. Evolut. Intell. 7(2):119–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12065-014-0109-3
Samuele R, Varshneya R, Johnson T, Johnson A, Glassman T (2010) Progress at the starshade testbed at northrop grumman aerospace systems: comparisons with computer simulations. In: Proceedings of SPIE, vol 7731, p 773151
Scheper KYW, Tijmons S, de Visser CC, de Croon GCHE (2016) Behavior trees for evolutionary robotics. Artif Life 22(1):23–48
Storn R, Price K (1997) Differential evolution—a simple and efficient heuristic for global optimization over continuous spaces. J Global Optim 11(4):341–359
Sutton RS, Barto AG (1998) Reinforcement learning: an introduction. MIT Press, Cambridge
Yosinski J, Clune J, Hidalgo D, Nguyen S, Zagal J, Lipson H (2011) Evolving robot gaits in hardware: the hyperneat generative encoding vs. parameter optimization. In: Proceedings of the 20th European conference on artificial life, pp 890–897
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Funding
This research received funding from the CSIRO Office of the Chief Executive for the Postdoctoral position in Evolutionary Aerial Robotics.
Conflicts of interest
The author declares that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix A: Fitness function
Appendix A: Fitness function
1.1 Symbol definitions: fitness function
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Howard, G.D., Elfes, A. A staged approach to evolving real-world UAV controllers. Evol. Intel. 12, 491–502 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12065-019-00242-5
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12065-019-00242-5