Revisiting Replanning from Scratch: Real-Time Incremental Planning with Fast Almost-Surely Asymptotically Optimal Planners
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Robots operating in changing environments either predict obstacle changes and/or plan quickly enough to react to them. Predictive approaches require a strong prior about the position and motion of obstacles. Reactive approaches require no assumptions about their environment but must replan quickly and find high-quality paths to navigate effectively. Reactive approaches often reuse information between queries to reduce planning cost. These techniques are conceptually sound but updating dense planning graphs when information changes can be computationally prohibitive. It can also require significant effort to detect the changes in some applications. This paper revisits the long-held assumption that reactive replanning requires updating existing plans. It shows that the incremental planning problem can alternatively be solved more efficiently as a series of independent problems using fast almost-surely asymptotically optimal (ASAO) planning algorithms. These ASAO algorithms quickly find an initial solution and converge towards an optimal solution which allows them to find consistent global plans in the presence of changing obstacles without requiring explicit plan reuse. This is demonstrated with simulated experiments where Effort Informed Trees (EIT*) finds shorter median solution paths than the tested reactive planning algorithms and is further validated using Asymptotically Optimal RRT-Connect (AORRTC) on a real-world planning problem on a robot arm.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it