Penalised and constrained geodesics in geometric control theory
Rufus Lawrence, Ale\v{s} Wodecki, Johannes Aspman, Jakub Mare\v{c}ek

TL;DR
This paper justifies using penalised and constrained approaches in geometric control problems on Riemannian manifolds, showing convergence of solutions and transforming control problems into geodesic problems.
Contribution
It demonstrates the validity of penalised methods for broad geometric control problems and introduces a coordinate change to simplify optimal control problems into geodesic problems.
Findings
Solutions to soft-constrained problems have accumulation points solving the hard-constrained problem.
Penalised approaches are justified for a broad class of geometric control problems.
Control problems can be transformed into geodesic problems via a coordinate change.
Abstract
In many problems in optimal control, one seeks to minimise an objective function subject to constraints on the velocity of the system. Imposing these constraints directly -- the ``hard-constrained'' approach -- is often analytically and computationally challenging. A natural alternative is to penalise violations of the constraints, solving a sequence of ``soft-constrained'' problems indexed by a penalty parameter , and hoping that solutions converge to solutions of the hard-constrained problem as . We show that this approach is justified when applied to a broad class of geometric control problems on a Riemannian manifold . We first consider the case where there are no autonomous dynamics, and so the control problem reduces to the problem of finding a curve of minimal length or energy between two points, subject to a nonholonomic velocity constraint/penalty…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
