Bio-Inspired Multi-UAV Path Planning Heuristics: A Review
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
Despite the rapid advances in autonomous guidance and navigation techniques for unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) systems, there are still many challenges in finding an optimal path planning algorithm that allows outlining a collision-free navigation route from the vehicle’s current position to a goal point. The challenges grow as the number of UAVs involved in the mission increases. Therefore, this work provides a comprehensive systematic review of the literature on the path planning algorithms for multi-UAV systems. In particular, the review focuses on biologically inspired (bio-inspired) algorithms due to their potential in overcoming the challenges associated with multi-UAV path planning problems. It presents a taxonomy for classifying existing algorithms and describes their evolution in the literature. The work offers a structured and accessible presentation of bio-inspired path planning algorithms for researchers in this subject, especially as no previous review exists with a similar scope. This classification is significant as it facilitates studying bio-inspired multi-UAV path planning algorithms under one framework, shows the main design features of the algorithms clearly to assist in a detailed comparison between them, understanding current research trends, and anticipating future directions. Our review showed that bio-inspired algorithms have a high potential to approach the multi-UAV path planning problem and identified challenges and future research directions that could help improve this dynamic research area.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.003 |
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