Resolving Conflicts Where and When They Arise: Reactive Composition of Multi-Goal Behavior

Multi-goal robotic tasks are commonly delegated to planning, because reactive control is prone to local minima when objectives conflict. We show that many such failures stem from static goal representations, not task complexity: the designer defines the objectives, but where and when they must be traded off follows from the world's interaction structure which changes with the state. To read this structure, we extend Active InterCONnect (AICON), a graph of recursive estimators coupled by differentiable interconnections, with adaptive nullspace projections: lower-priority gradients enter the nullspace of higher-priority ones wherever they meet along the graph, not only in action space, ordered by current gradient magnitudes, not a fixed hierarchy. Where two gradients oppose and no weighting of them makes progress, the system instead explores in the nullspace of the stronger one until the conflict dissolves. We robustly solve 100 non-convex navigation and 100 pushT problems, outperforming static potential fields, a diffusion policy, and the same method without projection. Unmodified but embedded in a larger graph, it absorbs perceptual uncertainty, joint limits, and self-collisions on a real robot, solving 49 of 50 pushing trials across varied objects, with active camera control and disturbance recovery emerging from the same coupling. Much of the behavior attributed to planning may thus be within reach of control, once goal representations compose from the conflicts they encounter.