MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411472236 · doi:10.1109/access.2025.3581807

Adaptive Multi-Robot Exploration for Unknown Environments Using Edge-Weighted Path Planning

2025· article· en· W4411472236 on OpenAlexaff
Farhad Baghyari, Tyler Parsons, Jaho Seo, Byeongjin Kim, Mingeuk Kim, Hanmin Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersNational Research Foundation of KoreaKorea Institute of Machinery and Materials
KeywordsMotion planningComputer scienceEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionRobotPath (computing)Mobile robotArtificial intelligenceComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Efficient multi-robot exploration of unknown environments is critical for numerous applications such as search and rescue, planetary exploration, and environmental monitoring. Existing centralized approaches struggle with scalability, while decentralized methods often incur high computational costs and inefficient task coordination. This study presents a scalable and adaptive multi-robot exploration algorithm that adaptively updates edge weights based on visit counts, reservations, and obstacles to optimize path allocation and minimize redundant scanning. The proposed algorithm ensures 100% area coverage and real-time adaptability, making it robust for exploration in many different unknown environments. The algorithm was validated in both a 2D grid-based simulation and a high-fidelity 3D environment using Isaac Sim with ROS integration. Experimental results demonstrate that the algorithm achieves improved exploration efficiency and adaptability compared to a real-time scheduling method while maintaining computational feasibility. The findings highlight the effectiveness of edge-weighting and reservation-based task allocation strategies for autonomous multi-robot systems in practical exploration scenarios.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score0.877

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207