skip to main content
10.1145/3377929.3398116acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgeccoConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

A parallel two-stage genetic algorithm for route planning

Published:08 July 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

Robotic path planning is an area of increasing importance given the interest in developing autonomous vehicles of all types and sizes. Consider, for example, a warehouse robot for a large internet commerce company. The robot's task is to retrieve a large number of items from warehouse shelves and deliver them to the packing area. Because efficiency is important, it is desirable for the robot to travel as short a distance as possible in completing its task. Though related to path planning, this is a distinct problem as there are multiple, perhaps many, destinations. We call this problem route planning. We present a parallel genetic algorithm that runs in two stages to solve the route planning problem. The two-stage approach significantly improves results over a similar singe-stage parallel genetic algorithm for this problem.

References

  1. Faez Ahmed and Kalyanmoy Deb. 2011. Multi-Objective Path Planning using Spline Representation. In Proc. IEEE Int'l Conf. Robotics & Biomimetics. 1047--1052.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. K. S. Al-Sultan and M. D. S. Aliyu. 1996. A new potential field-based algorithm for path planning. Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems 17, 3 (1996), 265--282.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. James C. Bean. 1994. Genetic Algorithms and Random Keys for Sequencing and Optimization. ORSA Journal on Computing 6, 2 (1994), 154--160.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Gerardo Berbeglia, Jean-François Cordeau, Irina Gribkovskaia, and Gilbert Laporte. 2007. Static Pickup and Delivery Problems: A Classification Scheme and Survey. In TOP 15. 1--31.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Kris Braekers, Katrien Ramaekers, and Inneke Van Nieuwenhuyse. 2016. The vehicle routing problem: State of the art classification and review. Computers & Industrial Engineering 99 (2016), 300--313.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. N. Buniyamin, W. Wan Ngah, N. Shariff, and Z. Mohammad. 2011. A simple local path planning algorithm for autonomous mobile robots. Journal of Systems Applications, Engineering & Development 5, 2 (2011), 151--159.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Fabio Caraffini, Giovanni Iacca, Ferrante Neri, Lorenzo Picinali, and Ernesto Mininno. 2013. A CMA-ES Super-fit Scheme for the Re-sampled Inheritance Search. In Proceedings of the IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation. 1123--1130.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Fabio Caraffini, Ferrante Neri, Gexiang Zhang, Jixiang Cheng, Lorenzo Picinali, Giovanni Iacca, and Ernesto Mininno. 2013. Super-fit Multicriteria Adaptive Differential Evolution. In Proceedings of the IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation. 1678--1685.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Q. Chen, C. Liu, and Z. Xiao. 2014. Improving MapReduce Performance Using Smart Speculative Execution Strategy. IEEE Trans. Comput. 63, 4 (April 2014), 954--967. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. H. Choset and P. Pignon. 1997. Coverage path planning: the boustrophedon decomposition. In International Conference on Field and Service Robotics.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Valeria de Carvalho Santos, Claudio Fabiano Motta Toledo, and Fernando Santos Osorio. 2015. An Exploratory Path Planning Method based on Genetic Algorithm for Autonomous Mobile Robots. In IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Kalyanmoy Deb, Amrit Pratap, Sameer Agarwal, and T. Meyarivan. 2002. A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 6, 2 (April 2002), 182--197.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. D. Ferguson, M. Likachev, and A. Stentz. 2005. A guide to heuristic-based path planning. In Proc. Int'l Conf. on Automated Planning and Scheduling.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. R. Glasius, A. Komoda, and S. Gielen. 1995. Neural Network dynamics for path planning and obstacle avoidance. Neural Networks 8, 1 (1995), 125--133.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. I. Hasircioglu, H. Topcuoglu, and M. Ermis. 2008. 3-D path planning for the navigation of unmanned aerial vehicles by using evolutionary algorithms. In Genetic Algorithms and Evolutionary Computation Conference. ACM, 1499--1506.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Yong K. Hwang and Narendra Ahuja. 1992. Gross motion planning - A survey. Comput. Surveys 24, 3 (1992), 219--291.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Giovanni Iacca, Rammohan Mallipeddi, Ernesto Mininno, Ferrante Neri, and Ponnuthurai N. Suganthan. 2011. Super-fit and Population Size Reduction in Compact Differential Evolution. In Proceedings of the IEEE Workshop on Memetic Computing. 1--8.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Shadi Ibrahim, Hai Jin, Lu Lu, Bingsheng He, Gabriel Antoniu, and Song Wu. 2012. Maestro: Replica-Aware Map Scheduling for MapReduce. In Proceedings of the 2012 12th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Cluster, Cloud and Grid Computing (Ccgrid 2012) (CCGRID '12). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 435--442. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. H. Jun and Z. Qingbao. 2010. Multi-objective mobile robot path planning based on improved genetic algorithm. In IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Computation Technology and Automation. 752--756.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. B. Kazimipour, X. Li, and A. Qin. 2013. Initialization Methods for Large Scale Global Optimization. In Proceedings of the IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation. 2750--2757.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. S. Kimura and K. Matsumura. 2005. Genetic Algorithms using Low-Discrepancy Sequences. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference. 1341--1346.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Shidong Li, Mingyue Ding, and Chao Cai. 2009. A novel path planning method based on path network. In 6th Int'l Symp Multispectral Image Processing and Pattern Recognition.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. H. David Mathias and Samantha S. Foley. 2019. Improving a Genetic Algorithm for Route Planning Using Parallelism with Speculative Execution. In Proceedings of the Practice and Experience in Advanced Research Computing. 1--5.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Edmund B. Nightingale, Peter M. Chen, and Jason Flinn. 2005. Speculative Execution in a Distributed File System. SIGOPS Oper. Syst. Rev. 39, 5 (Oct. 2005), 191--205. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Vincent R. Ragusa, H. David Mathias, Vera A. Kazakova, and Annie S. Wu. 2017. Enhanced Genetic Path Planning for Autonomous Flight. In Proceedings of the ACM Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference. 1208--1215.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Ravi Rajwar and James R. Goodman. 2001. Speculative Lock Elision: Enabling Highly Concurrent Multithreaded Execution. In Proceedings of the 34th Annual ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Microarchitecture (MICRO 34). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 294--305. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=563998.564036Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. James E. Smith. 1981. A Study of Branch Prediction Strategies. In Proceedings of the 8th Annual Symposium on Computer Architecture (ISCA '81). IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, 135--148. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=800052.801871Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Reiko Tanese. 1989. Distributed Genetic Algorithms. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Genetic Algorithms. 434--439.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. John Towns, Timothy Cockerill, Maytal Dahan, Ian Foster, Kelly Gaither, Andrew Grimshaw, Victor Hazelwood, Scott Lathrop, Dave Lifka, Gregory D. Peterson, Ralph Roskies, J. Ray Scott, and Nancy Wilkins-Diehr. 2014. XSEDE: Accelerating Scientific Discovery. Computing in Science and Engineering 16, 5 (2014), 62--74.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. J. Xiao, Z. Michalewicz, L. Zhang, and K. Trojanowski. 1997. Adaptive evolutionary planner/navigator for mobile robots. IEEE Trans Evol Comp 1, 1 (1997).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. C. Zheng, M. Ding, C. Zhou, and L. Li. 2004. Coevolving and cooperating path planner for multiple unmanned air vehicles. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 17 (2004), 887--896.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. A parallel two-stage genetic algorithm for route planning
            Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

            Recommendations

            Comments

            Login options

            Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

            Sign in
            • Published in

              cover image ACM Conferences
              GECCO '20: Proceedings of the 2020 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion
              July 2020
              1982 pages
              ISBN:9781450371278
              DOI:10.1145/3377929

              Copyright © 2020 ACM

              Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

              Publisher

              Association for Computing Machinery

              New York, NY, United States

              Publication History

              • Published: 8 July 2020

              Permissions

              Request permissions about this article.

              Request Permissions

              Check for updates

              Qualifiers

              • research-article

              Acceptance Rates

              Overall Acceptance Rate1,669of4,410submissions,38%

              Upcoming Conference

              GECCO '24
              Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
              July 14 - 18, 2024
              Melbourne , VIC , Australia

            PDF Format

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader