Decentralized Motion Planning for Multiple Mobile Robots: The Cocktail Party Model

This paper presents an approach for decentralized real-time motion planning for multiple mobile robots operating in a common 2-dimensional environment with unknown stationary obstacles. In our model, a robot can see (sense) the surrounding objects. It knows its current and its target's position, is able to distinguish a robot from an obstacle, and can assess the instantaneous motion of another robot. Other than this, a robot has no knowledge about the scene or of the paths and objectives of other robots. There is no mutual communication among the robots; no constraints are imposed on the paths or shapes of robots and obstacles. Each robot plans its path toward its target dynamically, based on its current position and the sensory feedback; only the translation component is considered for the planning purposes. With this model, it is clear that no provable motion planning strategy can be designed (a simple example with a dead-lock is discussed); this naturally points to heuristic algorithms. The suggested strategy is based on maze-searching techniques. Computer simulation results are provided that demonstrate good performance and a remarkable robustness of the algorithm (meaning by this a virtual impossibility to create a dead-lock in a “random” scene).

[1]  Sridhar Mahadevan,et al.  Automatic Programming of Behavior-Based Robots Using Reinforcement Learning , 1991, Artif. Intell..

[2]  J. T. Shwartz,et al.  On the Piano Movers' Problem : III , 1983 .

[3]  Pierre Tournassoud A strategy for obstacle avoidance and its application to mullti-robot systems , 1986, Proceedings. 1986 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[4]  J. Schwartz,et al.  On the Piano Movers' Problem: III. Coordinating the Motion of Several Independent Bodies: The Special Case of Circular Bodies Moving Amidst Polygonal Barriers , 1983 .

[5]  F. Frances Yao,et al.  Computational Geometry , 1991, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Volume A: Algorithms and Complexity.

[6]  Tomás Lozano-Pérez,et al.  On multiple moving objects , 1986, Proceedings. 1986 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[7]  Vladimir J. Lumelsky,et al.  Proximity sensing in robot manipulator motion planning: system and implementation issues , 1989, IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom..

[8]  Paul G. Spirakis,et al.  Strong NP-Hardness of Moving Many Discs , 1984, Inf. Process. Lett..

[9]  Stephen J. Buckley,et al.  Fast motion planning for multiple moving robots , 1989, Proceedings, 1989 International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[10]  R. J. Schilling,et al.  Decoupling of a Two-Axis Robotic Manipulator Using Nonlinear State Feedback: A Case Study , 1984 .

[11]  Harold Abelson,et al.  Turtle geometry : the computer as a medium for exploring mathematics , 1983 .

[12]  Victor Scheinman Robotworld: a multiple robot vision guided assembly system , 1988 .

[13]  Michael Ian Shamos,et al.  Computational geometry: an introduction , 1985 .

[14]  Maja J. Mataric,et al.  Interaction and intelligent behavior , 1994 .

[15]  Patricia C. Goldberg,et al.  Automatic Programming , 1974, Programming Methodology.

[16]  Jerome A. Feldman Automatic programming. , 1972 .

[17]  E. J.,et al.  ON THE COMPLEXITY OF MOTION PLANNING FOR MULTIPLE INDEPENDENT OBJECTS ; PSPACE HARDNESS OF THE " WAREHOUSEMAN ' S PROBLEM " . * * ) , 2022 .

[18]  S. Zucker,et al.  Toward Efficient Trajectory Planning: The Path-Velocity Decomposition , 1986 .