MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417229657 · doi:10.3389/frobt.2025.1658643

Social robot navigation: a review and benchmarking of learning-based methods

2025· article· en· W4417229657 on OpenAlexaff
Rashid Alyassi, César Cadena, Robert Riener, Diego Páez-Granados

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Robotics and AI · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSocial Robot Interaction and HRI
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersInnosuisse - Schweizerische Agentur für Innovationsförderung
KeywordsBenchmarkingSoftware deploymentKey (lock)RobotObstacle avoidanceBenchmark (surveying)ObstacleMotion planning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For autonomous mobile robots to operate effectively in human environments, navigation must extend beyond obstacle avoidance to incorporate social awareness. Safe and fluid interaction in shared spaces requires the ability to interpret human motion and adapt to social norms-an area that is being reshaped by advances in learning-based methods. This review examines recent progress in learning-based social navigation methods that deal with the complexities of human-robot coexistence. We introduce a taxonomy of navigation methods and analyze core system components, including realistic training environments and objectives that promote socially compliant behavior. We conduct a comprehensive benchmark of existing frameworks in challenging crowd scenarios, showing their advantages and shortcomings, while providing critical insights into the architectural choices that impact performance. We find that many learning-based approaches outperform model-based methods in realistic coordination scenarios such as navigating doorways. A key highlight is the end-to-end models, which achieve strong performance by directly planning from raw sensor input, enabling more efficient and adaptive navigation. This review also maps current trends and outlines ongoing challenges, offering a strategic roadmap for future research. We emphasize the need for models that accurately anticipate human movement, training environments that realistically simulate crowded spaces, and evaluation methods that capture real-world complexity. Advancing these areas will help overcome current limitations and move social navigation systems closer to safe, reliable deployment in everyday environments. Additional resources are available at: https://socialnavigation.github.io.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.394 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Robotics and AISame topicSocial Robot Interaction and HRIFrench-language works237,207