Multiobjective Task Allocation for Electric Harvesting Robots: A Hierarchical Route Reconstruction Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The increasing labor costs in agriculture have accelerated the adoption of multirobot systems for orchard harvesting. However, efficiently coordinating these systems is challenging due to the complex interplay between makespan and energy consumption, particularly under practical constraints like load-dependent speed variations and battery limitations. This article defines the multiobjective agricultural multielectrical-robot task allocation (AMERTA) problem, which systematically incorporates these often-overlooked real-world constraints. To address this problem, we propose a hybrid hierarchical route reconstruction algorithm (HRRA) that integrates several innovative mechanisms, including a hierarchical encoding structure, a dual-phase initialization method, task-sequence optimizers, and specialized route reconstruction operators. Extensive experiments on 45 test instances demonstrate HRRA's superior performance against seven state-of-the-art algorithms. Statistical analysis, including the Wilcoxon signed-rank and Friedman tests, empirically validates HRRA's competitiveness and its unique ability to explore previously inaccessible regions of the solution space. In general, this research contributes to the theoretical understanding of multirobot coordination by offering a novel problem formulation and an effective algorithm, thereby also providing practical insights for agricultural automation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".