Abstract-- A common robotics sensing problem is to place sensors to robustly monitor a set of assets, where robustness is assured by requiring asset p to be monitored by at least κ (p) sensors. Given n assets that must be observed by m sensors, each with a disk-shaped sensing region, where should the sensors be placed to minimize the total area observed? W e provide and analyze a fast heuristic for this problem. Subsequently, we enforce separation constraints between the sensors by modifying the integer program formulation and by changing the disk candidate set. I. Introduction Coordinating different kinds of robotic assets is a natural challenge when it comes to problems of surveillance and guidance. As shown in Figure 1, this gives rise to scenarios in which a finite set of drones with downward communication links must maintain control of a finite set of ground assets [7], [15], choosing a set of different altitudes that balance safe separation between drones with reliable communication to the ground. The latter requires sufficient signal strength, so communication areas (and thus energy consumption) depend quadratically on the altitude.

We consider the problem of reconfiguring a two-dimensional connected grid arrangement of passive building blocks from a start configuration to a goal configuration, using a single active robot that can move on the tiles, remove individual tiles from a given location and physically move them to a new position by walking on the remaining configuration. The objective is to determine a reconfiguration schedule that minimizes the overall makespan, while ensuring that the tile configuration remains connected. We provide both negative and positive results. (1) We present a generalized version of the problem, parameterized by weighted costs for moving with or without tiles, and show that this is NP-complete. (2) We give a polynomial-time constant-factor approximation algorithm for the case of disjoint start and target bounding boxes. In addition, our approach yields optimal carry distance for 2-scaled instances.

Abstract-- We present an analytic solution to the 3D Dubins path problem for paths composed of an initial circular arc, a straight component, and a final circular arc. These are commonly called CSC paths. By modeling the start and goal configurations of the path as the base frame and final frame of an RRPRR manipulator, we treat this as an inverse kinematics problem. The kinematic features of the 3D Dubins path are built into the constraints of our manipulator model. Furthermore, we show that the number of solutions is not constant, with up to seven valid CSC path solutions even in non-singular regions.

Given starting and ending positions and velocities, $L_2$ bounds on the acceleration and velocity, and the restriction to no more than two constant control inputs, this paper provides routines to compute the minimal-time path. Closed form solutions are provided for reaching a position in minimum time with and without a velocity bound, and for stopping at the goal position. A numeric solver is used to reach a goal position and velocity with no more than two constant control inputs. If a cruising phase at the terminal velocity is needed, this requires solving a non-linear equation with a single parameter. Code is provided on GitHub at https://github.com/RoboticSwarmControl/MinTimeL2pathsConstraints.

We investigate motion planning algorithms for the assembly of shapes in the \emph{tilt model} in which unit-square tiles move in a grid world under the influence of uniform external forces and self-assemble according to certain rules. We provide several heuristics and experimental evaluation of their success rate, solution length, runtime, and memory consumption.

These robots are subjected to the constraints of avoiding obstacles and maintaining connectivity of the structure. We develop two reconfiguration methods, one based on spatio-temporal planning, and one based on target swapping. Both methods achieve coordinated motion of robots by avoiding deadlocks and maintaining all constraints. Both methods also increase efficiency by reducing the amount of waiting times and lowering combined travel costs. The resulting progress is validated by simulations that also scale the number of robots.