Optimal Partitioning of Non-Convex Environments for Minimum Turn Coverage Planning
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 letter, we tackle the problem of planning an optimal coverage path for a robot operating indoors. Many existing approaches attempt to discourage turns in the path by covering the environment along the least number of <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">coverage lines</i> , i.e., straight-line paths. This is because turning not only slows down the robot but also negatively affects the quality of coverage, e.g., tools like cameras and cleaning attachments commonly have poor performance around turns. The problem of minimizing coverage lines however is typically solved using heuristics that do not guarantee optimality. In this work, we propose a turn-minimizing coverage planning method that computes the optimal number of axis-parallel (horizontal/vertical) coverage lines for the environment in polynomial time. We do this by formulating a linear program (LP) that optimally partitions the environment into axis-parallel <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">ranks</i> (non-intersecting rectangles of width equal to the tool width). We then generate coverage paths for a set of real-world indoor environments and compare the results with state-of-the-art coverage approaches.
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 | 0.000 |
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 it