Multirobot Persistent Monitoring: Minimizing Latency and Number of Robots With Recharging Constraints
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 article, we study multirobot path planning for persistent monitoring tasks. We consider the case where robots have a limited battery capacity with a discharge time <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$D$</tex-math></inline-formula>. We represent the areas to be monitored as the vertices of a weighted graph. For each vertex, there is a constraint on the maximum allowable time between robot visits, called the latency. The objective is to find the minimum number of robots that can satisfy these latency constraints while also ensuring that the robots periodically charge at a recharging depot. The decision version of this problem is known to be PSPACE-complete. We present a <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$O\left(\frac{\log D}{\log \log D} h \log \rho\right)$</tex-math></inline-formula> approximation algorithm for the problem where <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$\rho$</tex-math></inline-formula> is the ratio of the maximum and the minimum latency constraints, and <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$h$</tex-math></inline-formula> reflects the ratio of distance of vertices from the depot to their latency constraints. We also present an orienteering-based heuristic to solve the problem and show empirically that it typically provides higher quality solutions than the approximation algorithm. We extend our results to provide an algorithm for the problem of minimizing the maximum weighted latency given a fixed number of robots. We evaluate our algorithms on large problem instances in a patrolling scenario and in a wildfire monitoring application. We also compare the algorithms with an existing solver on benchmark instances.
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