MPC-CBF with Adaptive Safety Margins for Safety-Critical Teleoperation over Imperfect Network Connections
Open accessAbstract
The paper focuses on the design of a control strategy for safety-critical remote teleoperation. The main goal is to make the controlled system track the desired velocity specified by an operator while avoiding obstacles despite communication delays. Control Barrier Functions (CBFs) are used to define the safety constraints that the system has to respect to avoid obstacles, while Model Predictive Control (MPC) provides the framework for adjusting the desired input, taking the constraints into account. The resulting input is sent to the remote system, where appropriate low-level velocity controllers translate it into system-specific commands. The main novelty of the paper is a method to make the CBFs robust against the uncertainties caused by the network delays affecting the system's state and do so in a less conservative manner. The results show how the proposed method successfully solves the safety-critical teleoperation problem, making the controlled systems avoid obstacles with different types of network delay. The controller has also been tested in simulation and on a real manipulator, demonstrating its general applicability when reliable low-level velocity controllers are available.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The architectural implications of enforcing safety locally or remotely have not yet been systematically analyzed.
“While recent work has considered potential architectures for CBF in networked [9] or multi-rate [10] setups, the architectural implications of enforcing safety locally or remotely have not yet been systematically analyzed.”
From Where to Put Safety? Control Barrier Function Placement in Networked Control Systems (2026) · cites this paper as [9]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 27
- J. Vertut and P. Coiffet, Teleoperation and Robotics. Springer Netherlands, 1985.
- B. Siciliano and O. Khatib, Eds., Springer Handbook of Robotics. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2008.
- S. Hu, E. Babaians, M. Karimi, and E. Steinbach, "NMPC-MP: Real- time nonlinear model predictive control for safe motion planning in manipulator teleoperation," in 2021 IEEE/RSJ International Confer- ence on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). IEEE, 2021, pp. 8309-8316.
- A. Singletary, K. Klingebiel, J. Bourne, A. Browning, P. Tokumaru, and A. Ames, "Comparative analysis of control barrier functions and artificial potential fields for obstacle avoidance," in 2021 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). IEEE, Sep. 2021.
- F. Ferraguti, C. T. Landi, A. Singletary, H.-C. Lin, A. Ames, C. Secchi, and M. Bonfe, "Safety and efficiency in robotics: The control barrier functions approach," vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 139-151, 2022.
- P. Wieland and F. Allgöwer, "Constructive safety using control barrier functions," IFAC Proceedings Volumes, vol. 40, no. 12, pp. 462-467, 2007.
- A. D. Ames, S. Coogan, M. Egerstedt, G. Notomista, K. Sreenath, and P. Tabuada, "Control barrier functions: Theory and applications," in 2019 18th European Control Conference (ECC). IEEE, 2019, pp. 3420-3431.
- A. D. Ames, J. W. Grizzle, and P. Tabuada, "Control barrier function based quadratic programs with application to adaptive cruise control," in 53rd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control. IEEE, 2014, pp. 6271-6278.
- A. D. Ames, X. Xu, J. W. Grizzle, and P. Tabuada, "Control barrier function based quadratic programs for safety critical systems," IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 62, no. 8, pp. 3861-3876, Aug. 2017.
- S. Li, Z. Yuan, Y. Chen, F. Luo, Z. Yang, Q. Ye, W. Fu, and Y. Fu, "Optimizable control barrier functions to improve feasibility and add behavior diversity while ensuring safety," Electronics, vol. 11, no. 22, p. 3657, Nov. 2022.
- G. Wu and K. Sreenath, "Safety-critical and constrained geometric control synthesis using control lyapunov and control barrier functions for systems evolving on manifolds," in 2015 American Control Con- ference (ACC). IEEE, 2015, pp. 2038-2044.
- B. Xu and K. Sreenath, "Safe teleoperation of dynamic UAVs through control barrier functions," in 2018 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). IEEE, 2018, pp. 7848-7855.
- A. Singletary, Y. Chen, and A. D. Ames, "Control barrier functions for sampled-data systems with input delays," in 2020 59th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC). IEEE, 2020, pp. 804- 809.
- M. Rubagotti, T. Taunyazov, B. Omarali, and A. Shintemirov, "Semi- autonomous robot teleoperation with obstacle avoidance via model predictive control," IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 2746-2753, Jul. 2019.
- V. N. Sankaranarayanan, G. Damigos, A. S. Seisa, S. G. Satpute, T. Lindgren, and G. Nikolakopoulos, "PACED-5G: Predictive au- tonomous control using edge for drones over 5G," in 2023 Interna- tional Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems (ICUAS). IEEE, Jun. 2023.
- J. Zeng, B. Zhang, and K. Sreenath, "Safety-critical model predictive control with discrete-time control barrier function," in 2021 American Control Conference (ACC). IEEE, May 2021.
- A. Alan, T. G. Molnar, E. Das, A. D. Ames, and G. Orosz, "Distur- bance observers for robust safety-critical control with control barrier functions," IEEE Control Systems Letters, vol. 7, pp. 1123-1128, 2023.
- A. J. Taylor and A. D. Ames, "Adaptive safety with control barrier functions," in 2020 American Control Conference (ACC). IEEE, 2020, pp. 1399-1405.
- B. T. Lopez, J.-J. E. Slotine, and J. P. How, "Robust adaptive control barrier functions: An adaptive and data-driven approach to safety," IEEE Control Systems Letters, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 1031-1036, Jul. 2021.
- A. Alan, T. G. Molnar, A. D. Ames, and G. Orosz, "Parameterized barrier functions to guarantee safety under uncertainty," IEEE Control Systems Letters, vol. 7, pp. 2077-2082, 2023.
- L. Perko, Differential equations and dynamical systems. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013, vol. 7.
- M. Jankovic, "Robust control barrier functions for constrained stabi- lization of nonlinear systems," Automatica, vol. 96, pp. 359-367, Oct. 2018.
- J. Zeng, Z. Li, and K. Sreenath, "Enhancing feasibility and safety of nonlinear model predictive control with discrete-time control barrier functions," in 2021 60th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC). IEEE, Dec. 2021.
- R. Chipalkatty, G. Droge, and M. B. Egerstedt, "Less is more: Mixed-initiative model-predictive control with human inputs," IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 695-703, Jun. 2013.
- S. Macenski, T. Foote, B. Gerkey, C. Lalancette, and W. Woodall, "Robot operating system 2: Design, architecture, and uses in the wild," Science Robotics, vol. 7, no. 66, May 2022.
- J. A. E. Andersson, J. Gillis, G. Horn, J. B. Rawlings, and M. Diehl, "CasADi: a software framework for nonlinear optimization and opti- mal control," Mathematical Programming Computation, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1-36, Jul. 2018.
- A. Wächter and L. T. Biegler, "On the implementation of an interior- point filter line-search algorithm for large-scale nonlinear program- ming," Mathematical Programming, vol. 106, no. 1, pp. 25-57, Apr. 2005.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Where to Put Safety? Control Barrier Function Placement in Networked Control Systems
Beger, S., Chen, Y., & Hirche, S. (2026) · IEEE Control Systems Letters · doi:10.1109/lcsys.2026.3710212
- Authors
- Periotto, R., Ferizbegovic, M., Barbosa, F. S., & Sundin, R. C.
- Affiliations
- Agile Robots AG,Munich,Germany
- Ericsson (Sweden) (SE)
- Venue
- 2024 European Control Conference (ECC)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2024-06-25
- Pages
- 1609-1615
- OpenAlex
- W4393300446
- Cited by
- 7
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 3
- FWCI
- 8.98
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- European Control Conference (ECC) (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Teleoperation and Haptic Systems
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Advanced Control Systems Optimization
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Stability and Control of Uncertain Systems
- Keywords
- teleoperation, control barrier functions, model predictive control, network latency, communication uncertainty, obstacle avoidance, safety-critical control, robot manipulator control, speed tracking
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
