Multiobjective Dynamic Constrained Evolutionary Algorithm for Control of a Multi-segment Articulated Manipulator

  • Krzysztof Michalak
  • Patryk Filipiak
  • Piotr Lipinski
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8669)

Abstract

In this paper a multiobjective dynamic constrained evolutionary algorithm is proposed for control of a multi-segment articulated manipulator. The algorithm is tested in simulated dynamic environments with moving obstacles. The algorithm does not require previous training - a feasible sequence of movements is found and maintained based on a population of candidate movements. The population is evolved using typical evolutionary operators as well as several new ones that are dedicated for the manipulator control task. The algorithm is shown to handle manipulators with up to 100 segments. The increased maneuverability of the manipulator with 100 segments is well utilized by the algorithm. The results obtained for such manipulator are better than for the 10-segment one which is computationally easier to handle.

Keywords

inverse kinematics multiobjective evolutionary optimization constrained problems 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Aristidou, A., Lasenby, J.: Motion capture with constrained inverse kinematics for real-time hand tracking. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Communications, Control and Signal Processing (ISCCSP 2010), pp. 1–5 (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Deb, K., Agarwal, R.: Simulated binary crossover for continuous search space. Complex Systems 9(2), 115–148 (1995)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Deb, K., et al.: A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 6, 182–197 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Deb, K., Goyal, M.: A combined genetic adaptive search (GeneAS) for engineering design. Computer Science and Informatics 26, 30–45 (1996)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dong, H., et al.: Workspace density and inverse kinematics for planar serial revolute manipulators. Mechanism and Machine Theory 70, 508–522 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Duindam, V., Xu, J., Alterovitz, R., Sastry, S., Goldberg, K.: Three-dimensional motion planning algorithms for steerable needles using inverse kinematics. The International Journal of Robotics Research 29(7), 789–800 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Grefenstette, J.: Genetic algorithms for changing environments. In: Parallel Problem Solving from Nature 2, pp. 137–144. Elsevier (1992)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kallmann, M.: Analytical inverse kinematics with body posture control. Computer Animation and Virtual Worlds 19(2), 79–91 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pieper, D.L.: The kinematics of robots under computer control. Phd thesis, Stanford University (1968)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Singh, H.K., Isaacs, A., Ray, T., Smith, W.: Infeasibility driven evolutionary algorithm (IDEA) for engineering design optimization. In: Wobcke, W., Zhang, M. (eds.) AI 2008. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5360, pp. 104–115. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Krzysztof Michalak
    • 1
  • Patryk Filipiak
    • 2
  • Piotr Lipinski
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Information Technologies, Institute of Business InformaticsWroclaw University of EconomicsWroclawPoland
  2. 2.Computational Intelligence Research Group, Institute of Computer ScienceUniversity of WroclawWroclawPoland

Personalised recommendations