On Minimum Time Multi-Robot Planning with Guarantees on the Total Collected Reward
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we study a multi-robot planning problem where a team of robots visit locations in an environment to collect a specified amount of reward in the minimum possible time. Each location has a weight associated with it that represents the value or amount of reward that can be collected by visiting that location. The problem is to design tours for the robots to collect at least D units of reward while minimizing the length of the longest robot tour. The single robot unweighted version of this problem is called the k-STROLL problem. We provide a 3-approximation algorithm for the multiple robot version of the k-STROLL problem. This leads to an algorithm for the weighted problem that collects at least (1 - ϵ)D reward with tour lengths of at most 3 times the optimal tour length. The analysis of the approximation algorithm is then extended to provide bi-criterion approximations to two variations of the problem. We provide an application of the approximation algorithm for planning UAV tours with gimballed cameras for monitoring an urban environment.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it