Dual-Layer Subsumption Control for Sequential Behavior Planning

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

The traditional subsumption architecture in intelligent control systems lacks scalability and flexibility, making it difficult to execute specific sequences of behaviors, as all behaviors are emergent and unpredictable, which is undesirable in situations requiring planned actions.

Innovation Solution

A dual-layer subsumption control system is introduced, where sequential behavioral nodes generate plans and activity nodes execute these plans, allowing for both emergent and sequential behaviors, with priorities established at runtime to select and execute plans effectively.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If a traditional subsumption architecture with parallel independent behaviors is used, then flexibility and adaptability to environmental changes are improved, but the ability to execute specific sequences of behaviors deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveadaptability to environmental changesVSAvoidcontrol architecture complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The control architecture is segmented into two distinct layers: a plan execution subsystem that handles sequential behaviors and an activity selection subsystem that manages emergent behaviors. This segmentation allows each layer to specialize in specific types of control, resolving the contradiction by enabling both sequential execution and environmental adaptability through structured division of functions

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The invention introduces a hierarchical dimension to the control architecture, organizing behaviors across multiple levels (plan execution layer and activity selection layer) rather than a single flat layer. This dimensional organization enables the system to simultaneously maintain sequential behavior capabilities at the higher level and emergent behavior capabilities at the lower level

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

2Reliability

If fixed priority relationships between behaviors are established, then deterministic control is improved, but dynamic adaptability deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedeterministic controlVSAvoiddynamic behavior adjustment
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The plan execution subsystem dynamically adjusts the execution of sequential behaviors based on current system state and environmental feedback, while the activity selection subsystem dynamically selects among competing emergent behaviors. This dynamic operation at both layers resolves the contradiction by enabling deterministic sequential execution when needed while maintaining flexibility to adapt to changing conditions

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the operational parameters of different behavior layers based on situational requirements. The plan execution subsystem can adjust its sequencing parameters dynamically, and the activity selection subsystem can adjust priority weights of emergent behaviors, allowing the system to shift between deterministic and adaptive control modes as needed

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Adaptability or versatility

If the number of behaviors in the system is increased, then system functionality is improved, but control cycle feasibility deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem functionalityVSAvoidcontrol cycle efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

By segmenting the control architecture into two specialized subsystems, the invention enables the system to handle a larger number of behaviors without sacrificing control cycle efficiency. Each subsystem processes a specific type of behavior, avoiding the computational overhead of managing all behaviors in a single undifferentiated system

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The activity selection subsystem selectively activates only the relevant emergent behaviors needed for the current situation, rather than evaluating all possible behaviors. This partial action approach maintains control cycle feasibility even as the total number of available behaviors increases, as only a subset is actively processed at any given time

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentUS20240361753A1Sequential Behavior for Intelligent Control in Subsumption-Like Architecture
Publication Date: 2024.10.31 TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON (PUBL)
  • US20240361753A1 patent drawing
  • US20240361753A1 patent drawing
  • US20240361753A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A method for controlling operation of a system that interacts with an environment includes obtaining, by a plurality of sequential behavioral nodes, a plurality of plans for controlling the system, each plan comprising a sequence of activities to be performed by the system; selecting one of the respective plans for execution based on relative priorities of the sequential behavioral nodes; and executing the selected plan. Related subsumption-based controllers are also disclosed.