Multi-Criteria Optimization Manipulator Trajectory Planning

Abstract

In the last twenty years genetic algorithms (GAs) were applied in a plethora of fields such as: control, system identification, robotics, planning and scheduling, image processing, and pattern and speech recognition (Back et al., 1997). In robotics the problems of trajectory planning, collision avoidance and manipulator structure design considering a single criteria has been solved using several techniques (Alander, 2003). Most engineering applications require the optimization of several criteria simultaneously. Often the problems are complex, include discrete and continuous variables and there is no prior knowledge about the search space. These kind of problems are very more complex, since they consider multiple design criteria simultaneously within the optimization procedure. This is known as a multi-criteria (or multiobjective) optimization, that has been addressed successfully through GAs (Deb, 2001). The overall aim of multi-criteria evolutionary algorithms is to achieve a set of non-dominated optimal solutions known as Pareto front. At the end of the optimization procedure, instead of a single optimal (or near optimal) solution, the decision maker can select a solution from the Pareto front. Some of the key issues in multi-criteria GAs are: i) the number of objectives, ii) to obtain a Pareto front as wide as possible and iii) to achieve a Pareto front uniformly spread. Indeed, multi-objective techniques using GAs have been increasing in relevance as a research area. In 1989, Goldberg suggested the use of a GA to solve multi-objective problems and since then other researchers have been developing new methods, such as the multi-objective genetic algorithm (MOGA) (Fonseca & Fleming, 1995), the non-dominated sorted genetic algorithm (NSGA) (Deb, 2001), and the niched Pareto genetic algorithm (NPGA) (Horn et al., 1994), among several other variants (Coello, 1998). In this work the trajectory planning problem considers: i) robots with 2 and 3 degrees of freedom (dof ), ii) the inclusion of obstacles in the workspace and iii) up to five criteria that are used to qualify the evolving trajectory, namely the: joint traveling distance, joint velocity, end effector / Cartesian distance, end effector / Cartesian velocity and energy involved. These criteria are used to minimize the joint 27