The Optimization Route to Robotics—and Alternatives
| dc.contributor.author | Toussaint, Marc | |
| dc.contributor.author | Ritter, Helge | |
| dc.contributor.author | Brock, Oliver | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2018-01-08T09:18:05Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2018-01-08T09:18:05Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2015 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Formulating problems rigorously in terms of optimization principles has become a dominating approach in the fields of machine learning and computer vision. However, the systems described in these fields are in some respects different to integrated, modular, and embodied systems, such as the ones we aim to build in robotics. While representing systems via optimality principles is a powerful approach, relying on it as the sole approach to robotics raises substantial challenges. In this article, we take this as a starting point to discuss which ways of representing problems should be best-suited for robotics. We argue that an adequate choice of system representation—e.g. via optimization principles—must allow us to reflect the structure of the problem domain. We discuss system design principles, such as modularity, redundancy, stability, and dynamic processes, and the degree to which they are compatible with the optimization stance or instead point to alternative paradigms in robotics research. This discussion, we hope, will bring attention to this important and often ignored system-level issue in the context of robotics research. | |
| dc.identifier.pissn | 1610-1987 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/11486 | |
| dc.publisher | Springer | |
| dc.relation.ispartof | KI - Künstliche Intelligenz: Vol. 29, No. 4 | |
| dc.relation.ispartofseries | KI - Künstliche Intelligenz | |
| dc.title | The Optimization Route to Robotics—and Alternatives | |
| dc.type | Text/Journal Article | |
| gi.citation.endPage | 388 | |
| gi.citation.startPage | 379 |