End-to-end deep learning-based framework for path planning and collision checking: bin-picking application
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Real-time and efficient path planning is critical for all robotic systems. In particular, it is of greater importance for industrial robots since the overall planning and execution time directly impact the cycle time and automation economics in production lines. While the problem may not be complex in static environments, classical approaches are inefficient in high-dimensional environments in terms of planning time and optimality. Collision checking poses another challenge in obtaining a real-time solution for path planning in complex environments. To address these issues, we propose an end-to-end learning-based framework viz., Path Planning and Collision checking Network (PPCNet). The PPCNet generates the path by computing waypoints sequentially using two networks: the first network generates a waypoint, and the second one determines whether the waypoint is on a collision-free segment of the path. The end-to-end training process is based on imitation learning that uses data aggregation from the experience of an expert planner to train the two networks, simultaneously. We utilize two approaches for training a network that efficiently approximates the exact geometrical collision checking function. Finally, the PPCNet is evaluated in two different simulation environments and a practical implementation on a robotic arm for a bin-picking application. Compared to the state-of-the-art path-planning methods, our results show significant improvement in performance by greatly reducing the planning time with comparable success rates and path lengths.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".