Mixed Integer Programming for Time-Optimal Multi-Robot Coverage Path Planning with Efficient Heuristics (Extended Abstract)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate time-optimal Multi-Robot Coverage Path Planning (MCPP) for both unweighted and weighted terrains, which aims to minimize the coverage time, defined as the maximum travel time of all robots. Specifically, we focus on a reduction from MCPP to Min-Max Rooted Tree Cover (MMRTC). For the first time, we propose a Mixed Integer Programming (MIP) model to optimally solve MMRTC, resulting in an MCPP solution with a coverage time that is provably at most four times the optimal. Moreover, we propose two suboptimal yet effective heuristics that reduce the number of variables in the MIP model, thus improving its efficiency for large-scale MCPP instances. We show that both heuristics result in reduced-size MIP models that remain complete (i.e., guaranteed to find a solution if one exists) for all MMRTC instances. We validate the effectiveness of our MIP-based MCPP planner through experiments that compare it with two state-of-the-art MCPP planners on various instances, demonstrating a reduction in the coverage time by an average of 27.65% and 23.24% over them, respectively.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".