Share
Embed
PhD defense 1/2: Planning, Execution, Representation, and Their Integration for Multiple Moving Agents
https://kei18.github.io/phd-dissertation
planning & representation parts
Keisuke Okumura | 奥村圭祐
May 27, 2023
Transcript
100 slides
-
20th Jan. 2023 PhD Defense Planning, Execution, Representation, and Their
Integration for Multiple Moving Agents Keisuke Okumura Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan ౦ژۀେֶ 5PLZP*OTUJUVUFPG5FDIOPMPHZ http://bit.ly/3krriSO -
/99 2 YouTube/Mind Blowing Videos logistics YouTube/WIRED manufacturing YouTube/Tokyo 2020
entertainment Swarm { is, will be } necessary in everywhere -
/99 3 objective-1 Representation objective-2 Planning Common Knowledge? Cooperation? (increased)
Uncertainty Execution Navigation for a Team of Agents Who Plans? Huge Search Space -
/99 4 integration Representation [AAMAS-22+] building effective roadmaps Execution [AAAI-21,
ICRA-21, ICAPS-22*, IJCAI-22, AAAI-23+] overcoming uncertainties *Best Student Paper Award Planning ≥1000 agents within 1 sec [IJCAI-19, IROS-21, ICAPS-22*, AIJ-22, AAAI-23+] Research Summary -
/99 6 Short-Horizon Planning for MAPF Short-Horizon Planning for Unlabeled-MAPF
Short-Horizon Planning Guides Long-Horizon Planning Improving Solution Quality by Iterative Refinement 4. 5. 6. 7. Part I. Planning Building Representation from Learning Building Representation while Planning 11. 12. Part III. Representation Online Planning to Overcome Timing Uncertainties Offline Planning to Overcome Timing Uncertainties Offline Planning to Overcome Crash Faults 8. 9. 10. Part II. Execution Introduction, Preliminaries, and Background 1-3. Conclusion and Discussion 13. Dissertation Outline -
/99 7 Short-Horizon Planning for MAPF Short-Horizon Planning for Unlabeled-MAPF
Short-Horizon Planning Guides Long-Horizon Planning Improving Solution Quality by Iterative Refinement 4. 5. 6. 7. Part I. Planning Dissertation Outline -
/99 8 Background: Multi-Agent Path Finding (MAPF) given agents (starts)
graph goals solution paths without collisions optimization is intractable in various criteria [Yu+ AAAI-13, Ma+ AAAI-16, Banfi+ RA-L-17, Geft+ AAMAS-22] -
/99 9 Challenge in Planning quality & solvability high low
effort small large speed & scalability complete optimal incomplete suboptimal keeping solvability & solution quality with small planning effort holy grail -
/99 10 Approaches in Planning quality & solvability effort high
low small large speed & scalability approach-1 [Chap. 4-6] short-horizon planning guides long-horizon planning approach-2 [Chap. 7] iterative refinement planning time (sec) cost / lower bond 300 agents -
/99 11 Online Planning to Overcome Timing Uncertainties Offline Planning
to Overcome Timing Uncertainties Offline Planning to Overcome Crash Faults 8. 9. 10. Part II. Execution Dissertation Outline -
/99 12 Challenge in Execution failure demo of synchronous execution
planning execution reality gaps overcoming uncertainties at runtime -
/99 13 Approach in Execution new solution concepts for multi-agent
path planning timing-robust conventional 2 1 4 3 0 0 1 2 vulnerable to delays formalize, analyze, and solve problems against: timing uncertainties [Chap. 8-9] / crash faults [Chap. 10] -
/99 14 Building Representation from Learning Building Representation while Planning
11. 12. Part III. Representation Dissertation Outline -
/99 15 Background: Planning in Continuous Spaces given agents (starts)
goals workspace necessity of constructing roadmap solution paths without collisions -
/99 16 Challenge in Representation dense representation sparse representation produced
by PRM [Kavraki+ 96] complete optimal incomplete suboptimal building small but promising representation for planning quality & solvability effort high low small large speed & scalability -
/99 17 Approaches in Representation quality & solvability effort high
low small large speed & scalability approach-1 [Chap. 11] learning from planning demonstrations approach-2 [Chap. 12] building representation while planning -
/99 18 Short-Horizon Planning for MAPF Short-Horizon Planning Guides Long-Horizon
Planning 4. 6. Part I. Planning Building Representation from Learning Building Representation while Planning 11. 12. Part III. Representation Rest of Talk: Quick Multi-Agent Path Planning discrete continuous -
/99 19 Short-Horizon Planning for MAPF Short-Horizon Planning Guides Long-Horizon
Planning 4. 6. Part I. Planning Building Representation from Learning Building Representation while Planning 11. 12. Part III. Representation Quick Multi-Agent Path Planning discrete continuous -
/99 20 MAPF: Multi-Agent Path Finding given agents (starts) graph
goals solution paths without collisions optimization is intractable in various criteria [Yu+ AAAI-13, Ma+ AAAI-16, Banfi+ RA-L-17, Geft+ AAMAS-22] -
/99 21 quality & solvability effort high low small large
speed & scalability keeping solvability & solution quality with small planning effort complete optimal incomplete suboptimal keeping solvability & solution quality with small planning effort Challenge in Planning -
/99 22
solved instances (%) runtime (sec) Results on MAPF Benchmark [Stern+ SOCS-19] 13900 instances - 33 grid maps - random scenario - every 50 agents, up to max. (1000) tested on desktop PC 33 grid maps 0.0% A* [Hart+ 68] example 194x194 |V|=13,214 -
/99 23
solved instances (%) runtime (sec) 0.0% A* [Hart+ 68] 0.4% ODrM* [W agner+ AIJ-15] complete & optimal Results on MAPF Benchmark [Stern+ SOCS-19] 13900 instances - 33 grid maps - random scenario - every 50 agents, up to max. (1000) tested on desktop PC -
/99 24
solved instances (%) runtime (sec) 0.0% A* [Hart+ 68] 0.4% ODrM* [W agner+ AIJ-15] 8.3% CBS [Sharon+ AIJ-15; Li+ AIJ-21] 10.7% BCP [Lam+ COR-22] Results on MAPF Benchmark 13900 instances - 33 grid maps - random scenario - every 50 agents, up to max. (1000) tested on desktop PC solution complete* & optimal *SC: solution complete: unable to distinguish unsolvable instances comp & optimal -
/99 25
solved instances (%) runtime (sec) 0.0% A* [Hart+ 68] 0.4% ODrM* [W agner+ AIJ-15] 8.3% CBS [Sharon+ AIJ-15; Li+ AIJ-21] 10.7% BCP [Lam+ COR-22] 30.9% ODrM*-5 [W agner+ AIJ-15] Results on MAPF Benchmark [Stern+ SOCS-19] 13900 instances - 33 grid maps - random scenario - every 50 agents, up to max. (1000) tested on desktop PC comp & bounded sub-opt SC* & optimal *SC: solution complete: unable to distinguish unsolvable instances comp & optimal -
/99 26
solved instances (%) runtime (sec) 0.0% A* [Hart+ 68] 0.4% ODrM* [W agner+ AIJ-15] 8.3% CBS [Sharon+ AIJ-15; Li+ AIJ-21] 10.7% BCP [Lam+ COR-22] 30.9% ODrM*-5 [W agner+ AIJ-15] 50.5% EECBS-5 [Li+ AAAI-21] Results on MAPF Benchmark [Stern+ SOCS-19] 13900 instances - 33 grid maps - random scenario - every 50 agents, up to max. (1000) tested on desktop PC comp & bounded sub-opt SC & bounded sub-opt SC* & optimal *SC: solution complete: unable to distinguish unsolvable instances comp & optimal -
/99 27
solved instances (%) runtime (sec) 0.0% A* [Hart+ 68] 0.4% ODrM* [W agner+ AIJ-15] 8.3% CBS [Sharon+ AIJ-15; Li+ AIJ-21] 10.7% BCP [Lam+ COR-22] 30.9% ODrM*-5 [W agner+ AIJ-15] 50.5% EECBS-5 [Li+ AAAI-21] 61.4% PP [Silver AIIDE-05] 80.9% LNS2 [Li+ AAAI-22] comp & bounded sub-opt SC & bounded sub-opt incomp & sub-opt SC* & optimal comp & optimal Results on MAPF Benchmark [Stern+ SOCS-19] 13900 instances - 33 grid maps - random scenario - every 50 agents, up to max. (1000) tested on desktop PC [Stern+ SOCS-19] *SC: solution complete: unable to distinguish unsolvable instances -
/99 28 long-horizon (deliberative, offline) planning stage acting sage short-horizon
(reactive, online) Unblock Me, Google Play Planning Horizon -
/99 29 Strategy in Planning quality & solvability effort high
low small large speed & scalability complete optimal incomplete suboptimal long-horizon (deliberative, offline) short-horizon (reactive, online) -
/99 30 Strategy in Planning quality & solvability effort high
low small large speed & scalability integration short-horizon planning guides long-horizon planning long short -
/99 31 Proposed MAPF Algorithms quality & solvability effort high
low small large speed & scalability PIBT LaCAM LaCAM PIBT -
/99 32 Proposed MAPF Algorithms quality & solvability effort high
low small large speed & scalability PIBT LaCAM -
/99 33 planning online planning applicable to lifelong scenarios ≥500
agents within 50ms ensuring that all agents eventually reach their destinations https://kei18.github.io/pibt2 IJCAI-19 => AIJ-22 Priority Inheritance with Backtracking for Iterative Multi-agent Path Finding KO, Manao Machida, Xavier Defago & Yasumasa Tamura scalable sub-optimal algorithm (PIBT) to solve MAPF iteratively -
/99 34 locations at t=1 t=2 t=3 repeat one-timestep prioritized
planning high low mid How PIBT works – 1/6 … 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 decision order time-window -
/99 35 How PIBT works – 2/6 simple prioritized planning
is incomplete high low mid stuck -
/99 36 How PIBT works – 3/6 high low mid
as high priority inheritance [Sha+ IEEE Trans Comput-90] -
/99 37 high low mid How PIBT works – 4/6
1 3 2 decision order … … -
/99 38 How PIBT works – 5/6 high as high
as high as high as high stuck but still not feasible -
/99 39 How PIBT works – 6/6 invalid valid re-plan
re-plan valid You can move invalid You must re-plan, I will stay introduce backtracking repeat this one-timestep planning until termination -
/99 40 Theoretical Result With dynamic priorities,* in biconnected graphs,
all agents reach their destinations within finite timestep convenient in lifelong scenarios important note: PIBT is incomplete for MAPF unsolvable MAPF, but the theorem holds *s.t. unreached agents eventually get the highest -
/99 41 prioritized planning w/distance-based heuristics [Silver AIIDE-05] A* with
operator decomposition greedy version [Standley AAAI-10] EECBS CBS-based, bounded sub-optimal [Li+ AAAI-21] LNS2 large neighborhood search for MAPF [Li+ AAAI-22] PIBT Performance on one-shot MAPF 25 instances 30sec timeout on desktop PC sufficiently long timestep limit 194x194 four-connected grid sum-of-costs (normalized; min:1) runtime (sec) success rate agents not so bad not so bad blazing fast! worst: 550ms -
/99 42 PIBT is great but… agents
room-64-64-8 64x64 |V|=3,232 ost003d 194x194 |V|=13,214 agents random-32-32-20 32x32 |V|=819 agents important note: PIBT is incomplete for MAPF We need one more jump! PIBT 0% success rate in 30sec -
/99 43 Proposed MAPF Algorithms quality & solvability effort high
low small large speed & scalability PIBT LaCAM -
/99 44 planning LaCAM: Search-Based Algorithm for Quick Multi-Agent Pathfinding
KO agents room-64-64-8 ost003d agents random-32-32-20 agents success rate in 30sec 100% LaCAM worst: 699ms worst: 394ms worst: 11sec quick & complete algorithm for MAPF (LaCAM; lazy constraints addition search) https://kei18.github.io/lacam AAAI-23 -
/99 45 … … … … … search node (configuration)
Vanilla A* for MAPF greedy search: 44 nodes in general: (5^N)xT nodes N: agents, T: depth intractable even with perfect heuristics goal configuration -
/99 46 PIBT for MAPF PIBT PIBT PIBT greedy search:
44 nodes only 4 configurations repeat one-timestep planning until termination use PIBT to guide exhaustive search initial configuration goal configuration -
/99 47 … … … … … Concept of LaCAM
PIBT PIBT PIBT use other MAPF algorihtms to generate a promising configuration configurations are generated in a lazy manner by two-level search scheme exhaustive search but node generation are dramatically reduced => quick & complete MAPF -
/99 48 Lazy Constraints Addition constraint tree (maintained implicitly) invoked
multiple times during the search -
/99 51 Lazy Constraints Addition e.g., breadth-first search 24th invoke
Each configuration eventually generates all connected configurations. Theorem: LaCAM is complete discard node from Open configuration generation with -
/99 52 sum-of-costs (normalized; min:1)
runtime (sec) success rate agents prioritized planning w/distance-based heuristics [Silver AIIDE-05] A* with operator decomposition greedy version [Standley AAAI-10] EECBS CBS-based, bounded sub-optimal [Li+ AAAI-21] LNS2 large neighborhood search for MAPF [Li+ AAAI-22] PIBT [Okumura+ AIJ-22] Performance on one-shot MAPF 25 instances, on laptop 30sec timeout sufficiently long timestep limit 194x194 four-connected grid not so bad (diff from PIBT: tie-breaking) LaCAM blazing fast! worst: 699ms perfect! -
/99 53
success rate in 1000sec runtime (sec) agents (x1000) 25 instances, timeout of1000 sec, on desctop PC warehouse-20-40-10-2-2, 340x164; |V|=38,756 Performance with x1000 agents perfect! blazing fast! worst: 26sec for 10,000 agents LaCAM wrong thought: “centralized algorithms are not scalable” => NO, the game is changing PIBT demo of 10,000 agents -
/99 54 planning Improving LaCAM for Scalable Eventually Optimal Multi-Agent
Pathfinding KO (under review) LaCAM*: complete algorithm eventually converging to optima improved configuration generator: PIBT with reversed vertex scoring configuration & cost 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 before 1 1 2 3 3 2 3 0 after rewriting new edge updated by Dijkstra -
/99 55
solved instances (%) runtime (sec) 0.0% A* [Hart+ 68] 0.4% ODrM* [W agner+ AIJ-15] 8.3% CBS [Sharon+ AIJ-15; Li+ AIJ-21] 10.7% BCP [Lam+ COR-22] 30.9% ODrM*-5 [W agner+ AIJ-15] 50.5% EECBS-5 [Li+ AAAI-21] 61.4% PP [Silver AIIDE-05] 80.9% LNS2 [Li+ AAAI-22] Results on MAPF Benchmark 13900 instances - 33 grid maps - random scenario - every 50 agents, up to max. (1000) tested on desktop PC comp & bounded sub-opt SC & bounded sub-opt incomp & sub-opt SC* & optimal comp & optimal [Stern+ SOCS-19] *SC: solution complete: unable to distinguish unsolvable instances -
/99 56
solved instances (%) runtime (sec) 67.4% PIBT [Okumura+ AIJ-22] blazing fast! But room for improvements 13900 instances - 33 grid maps - random scenario - every 50 agents, up to max. (1000) tested on desktop PC comp & bounded sub-opt SC & bounded sub-opt incomp & sub-opt SC* & optimal comp & optimal Results on MAPF Benchmark [Stern+ SOCS-19] *SC: solution complete: unable to distinguish unsolvable instances -
/99 57
solved instances (%) runtime (sec) complete & eventually optimal! comp & optimal 13900 instances - 33 grid maps - random scenario - every 50 agents, up to max. (1000) tested on desktop PC 99.0% LaCAM* blazing fast! comp & bounded sub-opt SC & bounded sub-opt incomp & sub-opt SC* & optimal comp & optimal Results on MAPF Benchmark [Stern+ SOCS-19] *SC: solution complete: unable to distinguish unsolvable instances -
/99 58
solved instances (%) runtime (sec) comp & bounded sub-opt SC & bounded sub-opt incomp & sub-opt SC* & optimal comp & optimal Results on MAPF Benchmark [Stern+ SOCS-19] remaining: maze-128-128-1** **I do not care; it will be too optimized for the benchmark 13900 instances - 33 grid maps - random scenario - every 50 agents, up to max. (1000) tested on desktop PC 99.0% LaCAM* complete & eventually optimal! 32/33 maps: all solved in 10sec *SC: solution complete: unable to distinguish unsolvable instances -
/99 59 Summary in Planning quality & solvability effort high
low small large speed & scalability short-horizon planning guides long-horizon planning PIBT LaCAM(*) successfully breaking the trade-off -
/99 60 Short-Horizon Planning for MAPF Short-Horizon Planning Guides Long-Horizon
Planning 4. 6. Part I. Planning Building Representation from Learning Building Representation while Planning 11. 12. Part III. Representation Quick Multi-Agent Path Planning discrete continuous -
/99 61 MAPF Definition Again given agents (starts) graph goals
solution paths without collisions reality is continuous -
/99 62 Cool coordination but not efficient! why not move
diagonally? robots follow grid [Okumura+ ICAPS-22] -
/99 64 Multi-Agent Path Planning in Continuous Spaces given agents
(starts) goals solution paths without collisions finding solutions itself is tremendously challenging [Spirakis+ 84, Hopcroft+ IJRR, Hearn+ TCS-05] workspace -
/99 65 artificial potential field sampling-based rule-based goal start Strategies
to Solve Single-Agent Path Planning in Continuous Spaces constructing roadmap -
/99 66 SBMP: Sampling-Based Motion Planning state of robot: (x,
y) (x, y) should be in this region configuration space random sampling & construct roadmap pathfinding on roadmap same scheme even in high-dimension -
/99 67 Naïve Strategy to Solve Multi-Agent Path Planning in
Continuous Spaces Construct agent-wise roadmaps by SBMP (sampling-based motion planning) methods Solve MAPF on those roadmaps 1. 2. two-phase planning -
/99 68 Pitfall – There is a trade-off dense representation
sparse representation produced by PRM [Kavraki+ 96] complete optimal incomplete suboptimal ideal: small but promising representation for planning quality & solvability effort high low small large speed & scalability -
/99 69 Countermeasure biased sampling sampling from important region of
each agent how to identify? agent-specific features + interactions between agents 🤔 design manually? -
/99 70 Countermeasure biased sampling sampling from important region of
each agent how to identify? agent-specific features + interactions between agents This is machine learning problem! supervised learning: planning demonstration as training data -
/99 71 quality & solvability effort high low small large
speed & scalability learning from planning demonstrations CTRMs: Learning to Construct Cooperative Timed Roadmaps for Multi-agent Path Planning in Continuous Spaces KO,* Ryo Yonetani, Mai Nishimura & Asako Kanezaki representation https://omron-sinicx.github.io/ctrm AAMAS-22 *work done as an intern at OMRON SINIC X MAPF algorithm -
/99 72 𝐹!"#$ model training instances & solutions predict next
locations MAPF algorithm new instance 𝐹!"#$ random walk sampling module next locations for all agents starts path generation compositing solution … t=0 t=1 t=2 CTRMs Workflow Online Inference Offline Training CVAE: Conditional Variational Autoencoder [Sohn+ NeurIPS-15] +importance sampling [Salzmann+ ECCV-20] +multi-agent attention [Hoshen NeurIPS-17] 𝐹"#$% : -
/99 𝐹"#$% 73 next position instance & solution occupancy cost-to-go
env. info Offline Training & Model Arch. [Sohn+ NeurIPS-15] CVAE features ? -
/99 𝐹"#$% 74 + + goal-driven features relative positions, size,
speeds, etc Offline Training & Model Arch. -
/99 𝐹"#$% 75 + + comm. features attention Offline Training
& Model Arch. [Hoshen NeurIPS-17] -
/99 𝐹"#$% 77 + + + + go right [0,0,1]
next position goal-driven features comm. features indicator feature instance & solution occupancy cost-to-go env. info relative positions, size, speeds, etc attention Offline Training & Model Arch. [Sohn+ NeurIPS-15] CVAE [Hoshen NeurIPS-17] -
/99 78 observations for agent-i next predicted location for agent-i
trained model likely to be used by planners Online Inference -
/99 79 Online Inference timestep t timestep t+1 next predicted
locations for all agents observations for all agents -
/99 80 Online Inference 0 1 2 T T-1 …
initial locations timed path for agent-i each path is agent-specific and cooperative hyperparameter -
/99 81 … … … … compositing 0 1 2
T T-1 timed roadmap for agent-i each roadmap is agent-specific and cooperative hyperparameter: #(path generation) Online Inference -
/99 82 SPARS [Dobson & Bekris, IJRR-14] (random) simplified PRM
[Karaman & Frazzoli, IJRR-11] square as agent-specific roadmaps grid as used in MAPF studies CTRMs 20-30 homogeneous agents corresponding to 32x32 grids Roadmap Visualization CTRMs produce small but effective roadmaps specific to each agent -
/99 83 Quantitative Results S R P R R R
50 RP 3 5 T 20-30 homogeneous agents corresponding to 32x32 grids 100 instances solved by prioritized planning [Silver, AIIDE-05, Van Den Berg & Overmars IROS-05, etc] CTRMs reduce planning effort while keeping solution qualities params of CTRMs: #(path generations) denser denser -
/99 84 50 RP 3 5 T P R R
P S S 20-30 homogeneous agents corresponding to 32x32 grids 100 instances solved by prioritized planning [Silver, AIIDE-05, Van Den Berg & Overmars IROS-05, etc] CTRMs achieve efficient path-planning from the end-to-end perspective Roadmap construction can be much faster. Check our latest implementation: https://github.com/omron-sinicx/jaxmapp Quantitative Results quick! denser -
/99 85 Strategy in Representation quality & solvability effort high
low small large speed & scalability learning from planning demonstrations building representation while planning -
/99 86 Naïve Strategy to Solve Multi-Agent Path Planning in
Continuous Spaces Are roadmaps truly used in planning process? Construct agent-wise roadmaps by SBMP (sampling-based motion planning) methods Solve MAPF on those roadmaps 1. 2. two-phase planning decoupled -
/99 87 Advanced Strategy to Solve Multi-Agent Path Planning in
Continuous Spaces develop agent-wise roadmaps by SBMP according to MAPF search progress coupled -
/99 88 Quick Multi-Robot Motion Planning by Combining Sampling &
Search KO & Xavier Defago (under review) planning representation https://kei18.github.io/sssp algorithm (SSSP) to solve multi-robot motion planning quickly by simultaneously performing roadmap construction & collision-free pathfinding -
/99 89 MRMP: Multi-Robot Motion Planning MAPF is a special
case of MRMP solution: collision-free trajectories each agent has its own configuration space blackbox utility functions connect free space true false steer collide true false sample dist 0.18 -
/99 90 Proposed Algorithm: SSSP 0 1 2 0 1
2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 2 3 5 0 1 2 3 4 0 1 4 00 00 10 20 40 50 00 50 51 53 54 00 10 20 40 50 00 vertex expansion & goals new vertices closed next action exhaustive search while constructing roadmaps by random walks +many tricks inspired by SBMP & MAPF studies [MAPF; Standley AAAI-10] [SBMP; Hsu+ ICRA-97] search-node expansion -
/99 91 Theoretical Result SSSP eventually finds a solution for
solvable instances c.f., probabilistic completeness in SBMP -
/99 92 R P 3 0 6 33 6663 Point2d
DOF: 2N Point3d DOF: 3N R P 33 6 6663 Line2d DOF: 3N R P 3 0 33 6 6663 Capsule3d DOF: 6N R P 3 0 33 6 6663 Arm22 DOF: 2N Arm33 DOF: 6N R P 3 0 33 6 6663 Dubins2d DOF: 3N R P 6 33 6663 Snake2d DOF: 6N Performance of SSSP very promising quick! -
/99 93 Summary in Representation quality & solvability effort high
low small large speed & scalability learning from planning demonstrations building representation while planning successfully breaking the trade-off again -
/99 TODAY 95 Planning Representation Execution integration [AAMAS-22+] building effective
roadmaps [AAAI-21, ICRA-21, ICAPS-22, IJCAI-22, AAAI-23+] overcoming uncertainties ≥1000 agents within 1 sec [IJCAI-19, IROS-21, ICAPS-22, AIJ-22, AAAI-23+] Research Summary -
/99 96 Impact of Research Results breaking common belief of
trade-off (quality vs speed) connecting discrete & continuous spaces => promoting various types of automation develop new horizons of quick multi-agent path planning contribution: -
/99 97 YouTube/Mind Blowing Videos warehouse YouTube/StarCraft video game [Flatland
Challenge, AIcrowd] railway/airport operations [Morris+ AAAIW-16] [Le Goc+ UIST-16] robotic interface [Song+ ICCBB-01] drug discovery [Zhang+ 18] manufacturing [van den Berg+ ISRR-11] crowd simulation [Zhang+ SIGGRAPH-20] puzzle solving pipe routing [Belov+ SOCS-20] Impact of Research Results develop new horizons of quick multi-agent path planning contribution: -
/99 98 Future Direction integration LaCAM(*) PIBT planning in discretized
spaces SSSP CTRMs planning in continuous spaces establish practical methodologies to MRMP iterative refinement robust execution scalable & quick probabilistically complete asymptotically optimal, anytime with kinodynamic constraints -
/99 100 Publications 1. “Improving LaCAM for Scalable Eventually Optimal
Multi-Agent Pathfinding.” KO (under review) 2. “Quick Multi-Robot Motion Planning by Combining Sampling and Search.” KO & Xavier Défago. (under review) 3. “LaCAM: Search-Based Algorithm for Quick Multi-Agent Pathfinding.” KO. AAAI. 2023. 4. “Fault-Tolerant Offline Multi-Agent Path Planning.” KO & Sebastien Tixeuil. AAAI. 2023. 5. “Priority Inheritance with Backtracking for Iterative Multi-agent Path Finding.” KO, Manao Machida, Xavier Défago & Yasumasa Tamura. Artificial Intelligence (AIJ). 2022 (previously presented at IJCAI-19) 6. “Offline Time-Independent Multi-Agent Path Planning.” KO, François Bonnet, Yasumasa Tamura & Xavier Défago. IJCAI. 2022. (extended version is under review at T-RO) 7. “Solving Simultaneous Target Assignment and Path Planning Efficiently with Time-Independent Execution.” KO & Xavier Défago. ICAPS. 2022. (best student paper award, extended version is under review at AIJ) 8. “CTRMs: Learning to Construct Cooperative Timed Roadmaps for Multi-agent Path Planning in Continuous Spaces.” KO, Ryo Yonetani, Mai Nishimura & Asako Kanezaki. AAMAS. 2022. 9. “Iterative Refinement for Real-Time Multi-Robot Path Planning.” KO, Yasumasa Tamura & Xavier Défago. IROS. 2021. Others: 10. “Active Modular Environment for Robot Navigation.” Shota Kameyama, KO, Yasumasa Tamura & Xavier Défago. ICRA. 2021. 11. “Time-Independent Planning for Multiple Moving Agents.” KO, Yasumasa Tamura & Xavier Défago. AAAI. 2021. 12. “Roadside-assisted Cooperative Planning using Future Path Sharing for Autonomous Driving.” Mai Hirata, Manabu Tsukada, KO, Yasumasa Tamura, Hideya Ochiai & Xavier Défago. VTC. 2021. 13. “winPIBT: Extended Prioritized Algorithm for Iterative Multi-agent Path Finding.” KO, Yasumasa Tamura & Xavier Défago. WoMAPF. 2021. 14. “Amoeba Exploration: Coordinated Exploration with Distributed Robots.” KO, Yasumasa Tamura & Xavier Défago. iCAST. 2018. under review peer-reviewed