Motion Planning for Multiple Autonomous Vehicles

Conclusions
Rahul Kala
April, 2013 School of Systems, Engineering, University of Reading rkala.99k.org

Conclusions
Thesis

Trajectory Generation

Intelligent Management of the Transportation System

Motion Planning for Multiple Autonomous Vehicles

rkala.99k.org

Trajectory Planning Considering a single vehicle
S. No. Algorithm Optimality Completeness Computation Time, Scalability, Iterative (if deliberative) Little High, Reasonably scalable, Yes Fair, Largely scalable, No Fair, Largely scalable, No Little high, Poorly scalable, No Somewhat high, Poorly scalable, No 1. Genetic Algorithm Probabilistically Optimal. More exploitative version Complete for a was implemented, which meant less reasonable number of global optimality. obstacles Near-Complete

2. 3. 4.

Rapidly-Exploring No Random Trees (RRT)
RRT-Connect Multi Level Planning

Locally optimal, Globally optimal for Near-Complete simple cases Generally optimal. Can miss overtakes with very fine turns Near-Complete

5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

Planning using Generally optimal. Can miss dynamic distributed overtakes with very fine turns lanes
Fuzzy Logic No

Near-Complete No

Very Low, Completely Scalable, N/A Very Low, Completely Scalable, Lateral Potentials No No N/A Generally optimal. Can miss very fine Near-Complete (less Medium, Very scalable (more Elastic Strip turns than 2, 3, 4 and 5) than 2 and 3), N/A Low, Almost completely Logic based planning Locally near-optimal. (less than 3) No (more than 6 and 7) scalable, N/A

Motion Planning for Multiple Autonomous Vehicles

rkala.99k.org

Trajectory Planning Considering a single vehicle
• Optimality (more to less): Planning using Dynamic Distributed Lanes, Multi Level Planning, GA, RRT-Connect, RRT, Elastic Strip, Logic Based Planning, Lateral Potentials, and Fuzzy Logic. • Completeness (more to less): GA, RRT-Connect/RRT, Multi Level Planning, Planning using Dynamic Distributed Lanes, Elastic Strip, Logic Based Planning, Lateral Potentials and Fuzzy Logic.

• Computational time (least to highest): Fuzzy Logic, Lateral Potentials, Logic Based Planning, Elastic Strip, Multi Level Planning, Planning using Dynamic Distributed Lanes, RRTConnect, RRT and GA.
Motion Planning for Multiple Autonomous Vehicles rkala.99k.org

S. No.

Trajectory Planning Coordination
Algorithm Coordination Genetic Algorithm

Communication, Assumptions

Optimality

Computational complexity

1.

Somewhat high to Sub-optimal, Yes, Vehicles stay continuously alter speed and Traffic inspired heuristics for Global knowledge on their left check overtake feasibility. path/speed, Prioritization makes it more sides mostly Computation is distributed as desirable the vehicle travels Non-cooperative, Sub-optimal Non-cooperative, Sub-optimal A little high due to multiple attempts to compute speed Small time needed to decide between overtaking and vehicle following

2.

Prioritization, Attempt to Rapidly-Exploring Yes, One way maintain maximum collisionRandom Trees (RRT) traffic only free speed RRT-Connect Prioritization, Vehicle following/ overtake based speed determination Yes, One way traffic only

3.

4.

Layered Prioritization, Each layer uses separation Multi Level Planning maximization heuristic, Yes Vehicle following/ overtaking based speed determination Pseudo-centralized, Each state expansion uses Planning using separation maximization dynamic distributed Yes heuristic, Vehicle following/ lanes overtaking based speed determination Motion Planning for Multiple Autonomous Vehicles

Largely optimal

High due to a large number of re-planning of different vehicles at different levels

5.

Largely optimal, Cooperation can be slow

High as part trajectories of a number of vehicles need to be continuously be altered

rkala.99k.org

Trajectory Planning Coordination
S. No. Algorithm Coordination 6. Fuzzy Logic Vehicles treated as obstacles, Distances assessed for overtaking decision making, Speed controlled by fuzzy rules

Communication, Assumptions No, Vehicles stay on their left sides mostly, Roads not too wide to accommodate multiple vehicles per side of travel

Optimality

Computational complexity

Sub-optimal, Not accounting for Nil global knowledge makes it undesirable

7.

Lateral Potentials

8.

Elastic Strip

Vehicles treated as obstacles, Always overtake strategy, Distance from No, One way only front used for deciding speed Vehicles treated as moving obstacles, Always overtake strategy, Distance from No, One way only front used for deciding speed Vehicles treated as moving obstacles, Lateral distances No, Vehicles stay on measured for overtake their left sides decision making, Distance mostly from front used for deciding speed

Sub-optimal, Not accounting for Nil global knowledge makes it undesirable Sub-optimal, Not accounting for Very small time needed to global knowledge extrapolate vehicle motion makes it undesirable Sub-optimal, Cooperation can be slow, Not Very small time needed to accounting for extrapolate vehicle motion global knowledge makes it undesirable

9.

Logic based planning

Motion Planning for Multiple Autonomous Vehicles

rkala.99k.org

Trajectory Planning Coordination
Coordination

Computational Expense

Cooperation

Overtaking

Speed Determination

Deliberative

Cooperative

Always overtake

Immediate best

Reactive

Noncooperative

Compute feasibility

Optimized assignment

Motion Planning for Multiple Autonomous Vehicles

rkala.99k.org

Intelligent Transportation Systems
S. No. 1. Features traffic density, congestion control, risk, traffic lights, Routing objective/ expected travel time, best/worst travel time, time to considerations reach destination, start time, booked road (travel cost) frequent re-planning, fixed plans, incomplete or Routing frequency complete plans Routing traffic assumptions Traffic Lights recurrent, non-recurrent, recurrent with some possibility of non-recurrent trends Concept

2. 3. 4.

cyclic, earliest vehicle first based, most late vehicles first based overtake based (extra lane primarily used for overtaking), cooperative to vehicles running more 5. Lane change late, dynamic speed limit based, booked lane (travel cost) 6. Traffic for Multiple Autonomous entirely semi-autonomous, mixed, manual rkala.99k.org Motion Planning Vehicles

• Acknowledgements: • Commonwealth Scholarship Commission in the United Kingdom • British Council

Thank You
Motion Planning for Multiple Autonomous Vehicles rkala.99k.org

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.