Autonomous Exploration Based on Multi-Criteria Decision-Making and Using D* Lite Algorithm

被引:4
|
作者
Zagradjanin, Novak [1 ]
Pamucar, Dragan [2 ]
Jovanovic, Kosta [1 ]
Knezevic, Nikola [1 ]
Pavkovic, Bojan [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Belgrade, Sch Elect Engn, Belgrade 11120, Serbia
[2] Univ Def, Mil Acad, Dept Logist, Belgrade 11000, Serbia
[3] Mil Tech Inst, Belgrade 11030, Serbia
来源
关键词
Exploration strategies; multi-criteria decision-making; SAW; COPRAS; TOPSIS; STRATEGIES; NAVIGATION; MODEL;
D O I
10.32604/iasc.2022.021979
中图分类号
TP [自动化技术、计算机技术];
学科分类号
0812 ;
摘要
An autonomous robot is often in a situation to perform tasks or missions in an initially unknown environment. A logical approach to doing this implies discovering the environment by the incremental principle defined by the applied exploration strategy. A large number of exploration strategies apply the technique of selecting the next robot position between candidate locations on the frontier between the unknown and the known parts of the environment using the function that combines different criteria. The exploration strategies based on Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) using the standard SAW, COPRAS and TOPSIS methods are presented in the paper. Their performances are evaluated in terms of the analysis and comparison of the influence that each one of them has on the efficiency of exploration in environments with a different risk level of a "bad choice" in the selection of the next robot position. The simulation results show that, due to its characteristics related to the intention to minimize risk, the application of TOPSIS can provide a good exploration strategy in environments with a high level of considered risk. No significant difference is found in the application of the analyzed MCDM methods in the exploration of environments with a low level of considered risk. Also, the results confirm that MCDM-based exploration strategies achieve better results than strategies when only one criterion is used, regardless of the characteristics of the environment. The famous D* Lite algorithm is used for path planning.
引用
收藏
页码:1369 / 1386
页数:18
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Assessing business process orientation using multi-criteria decision-making
    Viegas, Renan Alves
    Costa, Ana Paula Cabral Seixas
    BUSINESS PROCESS MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, 2023, 29 (02) : 352 - 368
  • [42] SELECTING OPTIMAL PEDESTRIAN CROSSING USING MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION-MAKING
    Simunovic, Ljupko
    Grgurevic, Ivan
    Pasagic Skrinjar, Jasmina
    PROMET-TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION, 2010, 22 (02): : 105 - 116
  • [43] Using Different Qualitative Scales in a Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Procedure
    Gonzalez del Pozo, Raquel
    Dias, Luis C.
    Luis Garcia-Lapresta, Jose
    MATHEMATICS, 2020, 8 (03)
  • [44] Ranking based on optimal points multi-criteria decision-making method
    Zakeri, Shervin
    GREY SYSTEMS-THEORY AND APPLICATION, 2019, 9 (01) : 45 - 69
  • [45] Linguistic multi-criteria decision-making method based on emotion perception
    Zhou J.
    Xiao F.
    Du N.
    Yan X.-Y.
    Sun L.-J.
    Kongzhi yu Juece/Control and Decision, 2020, 35 (08): : 1945 - 1952
  • [46] Multi-criteria decision-making methods based on intuitionistic fuzzy sets
    Liu, Hua-Wen
    Wang, Guo-Jun
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 2007, 179 (01) : 220 - 233
  • [47] Pythagorean fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making based on prospect theory
    Chen L.
    Luo N.
    Xitong Gongcheng Lilun yu Shijian/System Engineering Theory and Practice, 2020, 40 (03): : 726 - 735
  • [48] MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION-MAKING (MCDM) TECHNIQUES IN PLANNING
    MASSAM, BH
    PROGRESS IN PLANNING, 1988, 30 : 1 - &
  • [49] A comparison of two multi-criteria decision-making techniques
    Akhavi, F
    Hayes, C
    2003 IEEE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SYSTEMS, MAN AND CYBERNETICS, VOLS 1-5, CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS, 2003, : 956 - 961
  • [50] Multi-Criteria Decision-Making for Heterogeneous Multiprocessor Scheduling
    Saroja, S.
    Revathi, T.
    Auluck, Nitin
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY & DECISION MAKING, 2018, 17 (05) : 1399 - 1427