4.6 Review

A Comprehensive Review of Coverage Path Planning in Robotics Using Classical and Heuristic Algorithms

Journal

IEEE ACCESS
Volume 9, Issue -, Pages 119310-119342

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3108177

Keywords

Coverage path planning; exploration; heuristic algorithm; deep reinforcement learning

Funding

  1. Fundamental Research Grant Scheme [FRGS/1/2019/TK04/USM/02/12]
  2. Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) Fellowship

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper discusses the principles, development trends, and optimization methods of coverage path planning, comparing the advantages and disadvantages of existing modeling and suggesting future research directions.
The small battery capacities of the mobile robot and the un-optimized planning efficiency of the industrial robot bottlenecked the time efficiency and productivity rate of coverage tasks in terms of speed and accuracy, putting a great constraint on the usability of the robot applications in various planning strategies in specific environmental conditions. Thus, it became highly desirable to address the optimization problems related to exploration and coverage path planning (CPP). In general, the goal of the CPP is to find an optimal coverage path with generates a collision-free trajectory by reducing the travel time, processing speed, cost energy, and the number of turns along the path length, as well as low overlapped rate, which reflect the robustness of CPP. This paper reviews the principle of CPP and discusses the development trend, including design variations and the characteristic of optimization algorithms, such as classical, heuristic, and most recent deep learning methods. Then, we compare the advantages and disadvantages of the existing CPP-based modeling in the area and target coverage. Finally, we conclude numerous open research problems of the CPP and make suggestions for future research directions to gain insights.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available