FPGA Acceleration of ROS2-Based Reinforcement Learning Agents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reinforcement learning agents have shown very good results in robot control and navigation tasks, allowing robots to learn how to interact with an environment appropriately in a model-free manner. However, real-world robot systems have strict latency, power, and cost constraints, thus requiring special hardware consideration for the demanding computations of neural networks. Furthermore, reinforcement learning networks should be able to interface efficiently with the various other robot components. To address these challenges, we propose a method for applying FPGA hardware accelerators to robotics reinforcement learning agents at the inference stage and seamlessly integrating the FPGA hardware module to the robot system by automatically wrapping it in a Robot Operating System 2 (ROS2) node. The proposed system is evaluated in three OpenAI gym control environments: Cartpole-v1, Acrobot-v1, and Pendulum-v0. In the evaluation, both quantized and non-quantized reinforcement learning neural networks are used, and the proposed FPGA system is observed to provide up to a 3.69x speed up and up to 52.7x better performance per watt when compared to an agent running on a ROS2 node on a modern CPU.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".