Hierarchical Task Model Predictive Control for Sequential Mobile Manipulation Tasks
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mobile manipulators are envisioned to serve more complex roles in people's everyday lives. With recent breakthroughs in large language models, task planners have become better at translating human verbal instructions into a sequence of tasks. However, there is still a need for a decision-making algorithm that can seamlessly interface with the high-level task planner to carry out the sequence of tasks efficiently. In this work, building on the idea of nonlinear lexicographic optimization, we propose a novel Hierarchical-Task Model Predictive Control framework that is able to complete sequential tasks with improved performance and reactivity by effectively leveraging the robot's redundancy. Compared to the state-of-the-art task-prioritized inverse kinematic control method, our approach has improved hierarchical trajectory tracking performance by 42% on average when facing task changes, robot singularity, and reference variations. Compared to a typical single-task architecture, our proposed hierarchical task control architecture enables the robot to traverse a shorter path in task space and achieves an execution time 2.3 times faster when executing a sequence of delivery tasks. We demonstrated the results with real-world experiments on a 9 degrees of freedom mobile manipulator.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it