A New Conflict Resolution Method for Multiple Mobile Robots in Cluttered Environments With Motion-Liveness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a new conflict resolution methodology for multiple mobile robots while ensuring their motion-liveness, especially for cluttered and dynamic environments. Our method constructs a mathematical formulation in a form of an optimization problem by minimizing the overall travel times of the robots subject to resolving all the conflicts in their motion. This optimization problem can be easily solved through coordinating only the robots' speeds. To overcome the computational cost in executing the algorithm for very cluttered environments, we develop an innovative method through clustering the environment into independent subproblems that can be solved using parallel programming techniques. We demonstrate the scalability of our approach through performing extensive simulations. Simulation results showed that our proposed method is capable of resolving the conflicts of 100 robots in less than 1.23 s in a cluttered environment that has 4357 intersections in the paths of the robots. We also developed an experimental testbed and demonstrated that our approach can be implemented in real time. We finally compared our approach with other existing methods in the literature both quantitatively and qualitatively. This comparison shows while our approach is mathematically sound, it is more computationally efficient, scalable for very large number of robots, and guarantees the live and smooth motion of robots.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".