This paper investigates the computational complexity of planning the motion of a body B in 2-D or 3-D space, so as to avoid collision with moving obstacles of known, easily computed, trajectories. Dynamic movement problems are of fundamental importance to robotics, but their computational complexity has not previously been investigated. We provide evidence that the 3-D dynamic movement problem is intractable even if B has only a constant number of degrees of freedom of movement. In particular, we prove the problem is PSPACE-hard if B is given a velocity modulus bound on its movements and is NP hard even if B has no velocity modulus bound, where in both cases B has 6 degrees of freedom. To prove these results we use a unique method of simulation of a Turing machine which uses time to encode configurations (whereas previous lower bound proofs in robotics used the system position to encode configurations and so required unbounded number of degrees of freedom). We also investigate a natural class of dynamic problems which we call asteroid avoidance problems: B, the object we wish to move, is a convex polyhedron which is free to move by translation with bounded velocity modulus, and the polyhedral obstacles have known translational trajectories but cannot rotate. This problem has many applications to robot, automobile, and aircraft collision avoidance. Our main positive results are polynomial time algorithms for the 2-D asteroid avoidance problem with bounded number of obstacles as well as single exponential time and nO(log n) space algorithms for the 3-D asteroid avoidance problem with an unbounded number of obstacles. Our techniques for solving these asteroid avoidance problems are novel in the sense that they are completely unrelated to previous algorithms for planning movement in the case of static obstacles. We also give some additional positive results for various other dynamic movers problems, and in particular give polynomial time algorithms for the case in which B has no velocity bounds and the movements of obstacles are algebraic in space-time.
[1]
John H. Reif,et al.
Complexity of the mover's problem and generalizations
,
1979,
20th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (sfcs 1979).
[2]
Tomás Lozano-Pérez,et al.
An algorithm for planning collision-free paths among polyhedral obstacles
,
1979,
CACM.
[3]
John E. Hopcroft,et al.
On the movement of robot arms in 2-dimensional bounded regions
,
1982,
23rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (sfcs 1982).
[4]
J. Schwartz,et al.
On the “piano movers'” problem I. The case of a two‐dimensional rigid polygonal body moving amidst polygonal barriers
,
1983
.
[5]
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
.
[6]
Micha Sharir,et al.
Retraction: A new approach to motion-planning
,
1983,
STOC.
[7]
J. Schwartz,et al.
On the “piano movers” problem. II. General techniques for computing topological properties of real algebraic manifolds
,
1983
.
[8]
John H. Reif,et al.
The complexity of elementary algebra and geometry
,
1984,
STOC '84.
[9]
J. Schwartz,et al.
On the Complexity of Motion Planning for Multiple Independent Objects; PSPACE- Hardness of the "Warehouseman's Problem"
,
1984
.
[10]
John E. Hopcroft,et al.
Movement Problems for 2-Dimensional Linkages
,
1984,
SIAM J. Comput..
[11]
J. Schwartz,et al.
On the Piano Movers''Problem V: The Case of a Rod Moving in Three-Dimensional Space amidst Polyhedra
,
1984
.
[12]
Joseph Y. Halpern,et al.
Decision procedures and expressiveness in the temporal logic of branching time
,
1982,
STOC '82.
[13]
Chee-Keng Yap,et al.
A "Retraction" Method for Planning the Motion of a Disc
,
1985,
J. Algorithms.