MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410114573 · doi:10.1109/tro.2025.3567476

Large-Scale Multirobot Coverage Path Planning on Grids With Path Deconfliction

2025· article· en· W4410114573 on OpenAlexafffund
Jingtao Tang, Z. Morley Mao, Hang Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Robotics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMotion planningPath (computing)RobotComputer scienceScale (ratio)Any-angle path planningMobile robotArtificial intelligenceGeographyComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study Multi-Robot Coverage Path Planning (MCPP) on a 4-neighbor 2D grid$G$, which aims to compute paths for multiple robots to cover all cells of$G$. Traditional approaches are limited as they first compute coverage trees on a quadrant coarsened grid$\mathcal {H}$and then employ the Spanning Tree Coverage (STC) paradigm to generate paths on$G$, making them inapplicable to grids with partially obstructed$2 \times 2$blocks. To address this limitation, we reformulate the problem directly on$G$, revolutionizing grid-based MCPP solving and establishing new NP-hardness results. We introduce Extended-STC (ESTC), a novel paradigm that extends STC to ensure complete coverage with bounded suboptimality, even when$\mathcal {H}$includes partially obstructed blocks. Furthermore, we present LS-MCPP, a new algorithmic framework that integrates ESTC with three novel types of neighborhood operators within a local search strategy to optimize coverage paths directly on$G$. Unlike prior grid-based MCPP work, our approach also incorporates a versatile post-processing procedure that applies Multi-Agent Path Finding (MAPF) techniques to MCPP for the first time, enabling a fusion of these two important fields in multi-robot coordination. This procedure effectively resolves inter-robot conflicts and accommodates turning costs by solving a MAPF variant, making our MCPP solutions more practical for real-world applications. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our approach significantly improves solution quality and efficiency, managing up to 100 robots on grids as large as$256 \times 256$within minutes of runtime. Validation with physical robots confirms the feasibility of our solutions under real-world conditions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on RoboticsSame topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207