MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Space-Time Graphs of Convex Sets for Multi-Robot Motion Planning

2025· article· W4416749187 on OpenAlexaff
Jingtao Tang, Z. Morley Mao, Hang Ma

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMotion planningRegular polygonConvex setConvex optimizationProper convex functionConvex analysisSubderivativeConvex combination

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We address the Multi-Robot Motion Planning (MRMP) problem of computing collision-free trajectories for multiple robots in shared continuous environments. While existing frameworks effectively decompose MRMP into singlerobot subproblems, spatiotemporal motion planning with dynamic obstacles remains challenging, particularly in cluttered or narrow-corridor settings. We propose Space-Time Graphs of Convex Sets (ST-GCS), a novel planner that systematically covers the collision-free space-time domain with convex sets instead of relying on random sampling. By extending Graphs of Convex Sets (GCS) into the time dimension, ST-GCS formulates time-optimal trajectories in a unified convex optimization that naturally accommodates velocity bounds and flexible arrival times. We also propose Exact Convex Decomposition (ECD) to "reserve" trajectories as spatiotemporal obstacles, maintaining a collision-free space-time graph of convex sets for subsequent planning. Integrated into two prioritized-planning frameworks, ST-GCS consistently achieves higher success rates and better solution quality than state-of-the-art sampling-based planners— often at orders-of-magnitude faster runtimes—underscoring its benefits for MRMP in challenging settings. Project page: https://sites.google.com/view/stgcs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.460
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.276 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207