Idle Time Optimization for Target Assignment and Path Finding in Sortation Centers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we study the one-shot and lifelong versions of the Target Assignment and Path Finding problem in automated sortation centers, where each agent needs to constantly assign itself a sorting station, move to its assigned station without colliding with obstacles or other agents, wait in the queue of that station to obtain a parcel for delivery, and then deliver the parcel to a sorting bin. The throughput of such centers is largely determined by the total idle time of all stations since their queues can frequently become empty. To address this problem, we first formalize and study the one-shot version that assigns stations to a set of agents and finds collision-free paths for the agents to their assigned stations. We present efficient algorithms for this task based on a novel min-cost max-flow formulation that minimizes the total idle time of all stations in a fixed time window. We then demonstrate how our algorithms for solving the one-shot problem can be applied to solving the lifelong problem as well. Experimentally, we believe to be the first researchers to consider real-world automated sortation centers using an industrial simulator with realistic data and a kinodynamic model of real robots. On this simulator, we showcase the benefits of our algorithms by demonstrating their efficiency and effectiveness for up to 350 agents.
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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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".