1
$\begingroup$

Model Predictive Control (MPC) works by finding a set of controls $u_0, \dots, u_n$ that minimize a cost function $J$ over a time-horizon $[t, t + T]$. Typically when MPC is used on mobile robots, each control $u_k$ is a vector of velocity commands that are applied for the duration $\delta$ of a slice $[t + \delta k, t + \delta (k + 1))$ of the time-horizon. The consequence is that for a given time-horizon size $T$, we need to optimize over $\lceil \frac{T}{\delta} \rceil$ controls.

I'm looking into using MPC for path-following, and I had the idea of using $n$-degree polynomials to generate the components of $u_k$, then redefine $J$ in terms of the polynomial coefficients. For example, in the case of a differential platform, use one polynomial $v(k) = v_t + a_1 k + a_2 k^2 \dots a_n k^n$ to generate linear velocities, $w(k) = w_t + b_1 k + b_2 k^2 \dots b_n k^n$ to generate angular velocities, and have the MPC optimize over $a_1, \dots, a_n, b_1, \dots, b_n$. That way we have $2n$ independent variables regardless the values of $\delta$ and $T$; additionally, $v(k)$ and $w(k)$ could easily be differentiated to provide optimization constraints over acceleration, jerk etc.

This seemed like a reasonable idea to me, so I was certain I would find it already covered in the literature. However almost all articles I've seen so far stick to the approach of defining one independent control set per time slice; the only exception is this one, which instead optimizes over the space of targets for a pure-pursuit-like control law.

Am I missing something? Is there an obvious reason this approach wouldn't work (or at least not be worth the trouble) that I'm overlooking? Is it documented somewhere and I just wasn't able to find any references?

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.