Safe Motion Planning and Control Using Predictive and Adaptive Barrier Methods for Autonomous Surface Vessels

Safe motion planning is essential for autonomous vessel operations, especially in challenging spaces such as narrow inland waterways. However, conventional motion planning approaches are often computationally intensive or overly conservative. This paper proposes a safe motion planning strategy combining Model Predictive Control (MPC) and Control Barrier Functions (CBFs). We introduce a time-varying inflated ellipse obstacle representation, where the inflation radius is adjusted depending on the relative position and attitude between the vessel and the obstacle. The proposed adaptive inflation reduces the conservativeness of the controller compared to traditional fixed-ellipsoid obstacle formulations. The MPC solution provides an approximate motion plan, and high-order CBFs ensure the vessel's safety using the varying inflation radius. Simulation and real-world experiments demonstrate that the proposed strategy enables the fully-actuated autonomous robot vessel to navigate through narrow spaces in real time and resolve potential deadlocks, all while ensuring safety.

Deep Reinforcement Learning Based Tracking Control of an Autonomous Surface Vessel in Natural Waters

Accurate control of autonomous marine robots still poses challenges due to the complex dynamics of the environment. In this paper, we propose a Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) approach to train a controller for autonomous surface vessel (ASV) trajectory tracking and compare its performance with an advanced nonlinear model predictive controller (NMPC) in real environments. Taking into account environmental disturbances (e.g., wind, waves, and currents), noisy measurements, and non-ideal actuators presented in the physical ASV, several effective reward functions for DRL tracking control policies are carefully designed. The control policies were trained in a simulation environment with diverse tracking trajectories and disturbances. The performance of the DRL controller has been verified and compared with the NMPC in both simulations with model-based environmental disturbances and in natural waters. Simulations show that the DRL controller has 53.33% lower tracking error than that of NMPC. Experimental results further show that, compared to NMPC, the DRL controller has 35.51% lower tracking error, indicating that DRL controllers offer better disturbance rejection in river environments than NMPC.