论文标题

远端教师学习与数值和分析方法的比较,以求解刚体机制的逆运动学

Comparison of Distal Teacher Learning with Numerical and Analytical Methods to Solve Inverse Kinematics for Rigid-Body Mechanisms

论文作者

von Oehsen, Tim, Fabisch, Alexander, Kumar, Shivesh, Kirchner, Frank

论文摘要

几个出版物都与学习逆运动学有关,但是,它们的评估通常受到限制,并且所提出的方法与具有已知远期模型的僵化运动学相关。我们认为,对于刚体运动学,当与可区别的编程库相结合时,倒数运动学的最早提议的机器学习(ML)解决方案之一实际上已经足够好,我们提供了与分析和数值解决方案的广泛评估和比较。特别是,我们分析了解决速率,准确性,样本效率和可扩展性。此外,我们研究了DT如何处理关节限制,奇异性,无法达到的姿势,轨迹并提供执行时间的比较。对三种不同的刚体机制进行了评估,这些方法的复杂性不同。借助足够的训练数据和放松的精度要求,DT具有更好的求解速率,并且比最先进的数值求解器更快,用于15D-DOF机制。 DT不受奇异性的影响,而数值解决方案很容易受到影响。在所有其他情况下,数值解决方案通常更好。分析解决方案(如果有可用的话)胜过其他方法。

Several publications are concerned with learning inverse kinematics, however, their evaluation is often limited and none of the proposed methods is of practical relevance for rigid-body kinematics with a known forward model. We argue that for rigid-body kinematics one of the first proposed machine learning (ML) solutions to inverse kinematics -- distal teaching (DT) -- is actually good enough when combined with differentiable programming libraries and we provide an extensive evaluation and comparison to analytical and numerical solutions. In particular, we analyze solve rate, accuracy, sample efficiency and scalability. Further, we study how DT handles joint limits, singularities, unreachable poses, trajectories and provide a comparison of execution times. The three approaches are evaluated on three different rigid body mechanisms with varying complexity. With enough training data and relaxed precision requirements, DT has a better solve rate and is faster than state-of-the-art numerical solvers for a 15-DoF mechanism. DT is not affected by singularities while numerical solutions are vulnerable to them. In all other cases numerical solutions are usually better. Analytical solutions outperform the other approaches by far if they are available.

扫码加入交流群

加入微信交流群

微信交流群二维码

扫码加入学术交流群,获取更多资源