Decentralized Multi-Robot Navigation Based on Deep Reinforcement Learning and Trajectory Optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multi-robot systems are significant in decision-making capabilities and applications, but avoiding collisions during movement remains a critical challenge. Existing decentralized obstacle avoidance strategies, while low in computational cost, often fail to ensure safety effectively. To address this issue, this paper leverages graph neural networks (GNNs) and deep reinforcement learning (DRL) to aggregate high-dimensional features as inputs for reinforcement learning (RL) to generate paths. Additionally, it introduces safety constraints through an artificial potential field (APF) to optimize these trajectories. Additionally, a constrained nonlinear optimization method further refines the APF-adjusted paths, resulting in the development of the GNN-RL-APF-Lagrangian algorithm. By combining APF and nonlinear optimization techniques, experimental results demonstrate that this method significantly enhances the safety and obstacle avoidance capabilities of multi-robot systems in complex environments. The proposed GNN-RL-APF-Lagrangian algorithm achieves a 96.43% success rate in sparse obstacle environments and 89.77% in dense obstacle scenarios, representing improvements of 59% and 60%, respectively, over baseline GNN-RL approaches. The method maintains scalability up to 30 robots while preserving distributed execution properties.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".