Learning to Drive on Mars:
Visual Multimodal Traversability Estimation for Off-World Navigation

Darren Chiu1,3
Cole Wilson2,3
Andrei Tumbar3
Gaurav S. Sukhatme1
Steven Myint3
University of Southern California1
Washington State University2
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory3
University of Southern California Washington State University NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Under Review

The Mars 2020 Perseverance Dataset

Each sol contains a sequence of grayscale image pairs, acceleration readings, rocker-bogie angles, tilt, and slip estimates. The grayscale image pairs are generated once every $1m$ of driving whereas pose and proprioception is collected at approximately $8 \ hz$.

Sol 203
Sol 419
Sol 538
Sol 838
Sol 868
Sol 896
Sol 1298
Sol 1326
Sol 1332
Sol 1578
Sol 1590
Sol 1646
Sol 1688

Traversability Estimation Framework

Architecture of the traversability model. The dotted region denotes the deployment path. The transformer component is trained through two core loss functions: a contrastive feature ranking noted $\mathcal{L}_{rank}$ and a contrastive multimodal alignment, $\mathcal{L}_{mm}$. $\mathcal{L}_{rank}$ is meant to rank images features based on how well the rover drove over it (measured by slip) and contrasts it from features that were not driven on ($\sim$), such as large boulders. The $\mathcal{L}_{mm}$ then contributes other proprioceptive signals such vehicle tilt, rocker-bogie angles, and acceleration. The final MLP is trained using a pinball loss to generate quantiles of slip prediction. Our final traversability score is generated by taking the $traversability = \max(q_{90} - q_{10},\, q_{50})$, where $q_{50}$ represents the median slip prediction and $q_{90} - q_{10}$ is the prediction uncertainty (predicted slip distribution width).

Overview figure

Integration with ENav

We integrate the learned traversability score into ENav, the onboard navigation planner, where it augments the geometric cost map used for path selection. This lets the rover account for terrain that is geometrically benign but visually or proprioceptively risky (e.g., loose or slippery surfaces) without changes to the underlying planning pipeline.

Software integration diagram

Predicted Traversability vs. Wheel Track Slip Labels

We compare our model's predicted traversability against the rover's actual wheel tracks on Sol 543. The traversability score, $\max(q_{90} - q_{10},\, q_{50})$, combines the median predicted slip with the prediction uncertainty, highlighting regions the model expects to be difficult or unfamiliar to drive over.

Deployment

Our traversability model running during a drive, shown at 8× speed with a Navcam inset for context. The predicted traversability map updates as the rover perceives new terrain, guiding path selection in concert with the onboard navigation planner.

Acknowledgements

This research was carried out at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (80NM0018D0004). This work was supported by JPL’s Strategic Research and Technology Development (SRTD) program. The High Performance Computing resources used in this investigation were provided by funding from the JPL Enterprise IT Division. The authors would like to thank Tyler Del Sesto and Richard Rieber for their insightful discussions on the hardware platform and ENav algorithm, along with JPL's Rover Operations Center (ROC) for their support.

Website template adapted from Recipe / HATO.