arxiv: 2603.16059 · v2 · submitted 2026-03-17 · 💻 cs.RO

Recognition: no theorem link

Ultrafast Sampling-based Kinodynamic Planning via Differential Flatness

Thai Duong , Clayton W. Ramsey , Zachary Kingston , Wil Thomason , Lydia E. Kavraki

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 10:45 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.RO

keywords kinodynamic planningdifferential flatnesssampling-based motion planningboundary value problemsparallel trajectory validationrobot dynamicsasymptotic optimality

0 comments

The pith

FLASK solves kinodynamic planning for flat robots by turning boundary problems into analytical flat-output trajectories.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper introduces FLASK, a framework that accelerates sampling-based kinodynamic motion planning for robots such as manipulators and vehicles. Differential flatness converts the planning task into a flat output space where closed-form time-parameterized solutions to two-point boundary value problems become available. These solutions convert back to dynamically feasible trajectories in the original state space, enabling single-instruction multiple-data parallel validation. The result is compatibility with any sampling-based planner plus guarantees of probabilistic exhaustiveness and asymptotic optimality, with observed planning times dropping to microseconds or milliseconds in cluttered settings.

Core claim

FLASK is a fast parallelized sampling-based kinodynamic motion planning framework for a broad class of differentially flat robot systems. Differential flatness allows transformation of the motion planning problem to a flat output space where an analytical time-parameterized solution of the BVP can be obtained. A trajectory in the flat output space is then converted back to a closed-form dynamically feasible trajectory in the original state space, enabling fast validation via SIMD parallelism. The framework is compatible with any sampling-based motion planner and offers theoretical guarantees on probabilistic exhaustibility and asymptotic optimality based on the closed-form BVP solutions.

What carries the argument

Differential flatness, which maps the original state-space planning problem to a flat output space that admits closed-form analytical solutions to the two-point boundary-value problem and allows direct conversion back to feasible trajectories.

If this is right

Any sampling-based planner can now enforce dynamics constraints without repeated numerical integration or expensive BVP solvers.
Planning for high-DOF manipulators and vehicles becomes fast enough for online use in dynamic scenes.
Probabilistic completeness and asymptotic optimality carry over directly from the underlying sampler because BVP solutions are exact.
Parallel hardware can validate thousands of candidate trajectories simultaneously through vectorized flat-space operations.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Systems that are only approximately flat could be handled by treating residual dynamics as bounded disturbances.
The same flat-output reduction might simplify other constrained planning tasks such as those involving contact or task-space constraints.
Combining the method with learned priors on flat-output paths could further reduce the number of samples needed in high-dimensional spaces.

Load-bearing premise

The robot systems must be differentially flat so that an analytical time-parameterized solution of the two-point boundary-value problem exists in the flat output space.

What would settle it

Run the planner on a known differentially flat system in a cluttered environment and observe whether planning times remain above milliseconds or produced trajectories violate dynamics when executed on the robot.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.16059 by Clayton W. Ramsey, Lydia E. Kavraki, Thai Duong, Wil Thomason, Zachary Kingston.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: Motion planning for a “pick and place” task in a cluttered environment: a dynamically feasible trajectory (a) generated from our FLASK framework can be accurately tracked by a UR5 robot. Meanwhile, tracking a geometric path (b) leads to collisions (shown in red) that topple the nearby boxes. Multiple intermediate states are overlaid to illustrate the robot’s motion. Our planning framework is real-time and … view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Configuration samples a, b, c and d, discretized from a linear path (a), as in VAMP [7], and from our closed-form time-parameterized motions (b), can be efficiently checked for collision using SIMD parallelism. V. TECHNICAL APPROACH In this section, we present our kinodynamic planning framework, FLASK, by showing that the flat output evolves as a linear system (Sec. V-A), and hence, allows us to convert P… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Formulating the kinodynamic planning problem in the flat state space [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Our theoretical analysis: (a) Probabilistic exhaustivity: as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Visualization of trajectories generated by our [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_6.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Our trajectory is smoother and dynamically feasible, leading to better tracking performance. For example, the third joint angle [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: The “pick and place” task with UR5 robot in a cluttered environment with narrow passages: (a) our kinodynamic planner successfully finishes the task [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_8.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: Reactive planning with moving obstacles: our UR5 robot successfully [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_9.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: Planning and simplification time in our “p [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_10.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Motion planning under dynamics constraints, i.e, kinodynamic planning, enables safe robot operation by generating dynamically feasible trajectories that the robot can accurately track. For high-DOF robots such as manipulators, sampling-based motion planners are commonly used, especially for complex tasks in cluttered environments. However, enforcing constraints on robot dynamics in such planners requires solving either challenging two-point boundary value problems (BVPs) or propagating robot dynamics, both of which cause computational bottlenecks that drastically increase planning times. Meanwhile, recent efforts have shown that sampling-based motion planners can generate plans in microseconds using parallelization, but are limited to geometric paths. This paper develops FLASK, a fast parallelized sampling-based kinodynamic motion planning framework for a broad class of differentially flat robot systems, including manipulators, ground and aerial vehicles, and more. Differential flatness allows us to transform the motion planning problem from the original state space to a flat output space, where an analytical time-parameterized solution of the BVP problem can be obtained. A trajectory in the flat output space is then converted back to a closed-form dynamically feasible trajectory in the original state space, enabling fast validation via ``single instruction, multiple data" parallelism. Our framework is fast, exact, and compatible with any sampling-based motion planner, while offering theoretical guarantees on probabilistic exhaustibility and asymptotic optimality based on the closed-form BVP solutions. We extensively verify the effectiveness of our approach in both simulated benchmarks and real experiments with cluttered and dynamic environments, requiring mere microseconds to milliseconds of planning time.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

FLASK gives a clean speed-up for kinodynamic sampling planners on flat systems by turning the BVP into closed-form solutions in output space.

read the letter

The main takeaway is that this work exploits differential flatness to replace slow numerical BVP solving or dynamics propagation with an analytical steering function. The flat-output trajectory is solved in closed form, mapped back to state space, and then checked in parallel via SIMD inside any standard sampling planner. That move directly supports the usual probabilistic completeness and asymptotic optimality arguments because the steering is exact rather than approximate. Experiments report planning times in the microseconds-to-milliseconds range on manipulators, ground vehicles, and aerial systems in cluttered and dynamic scenes, which matches the practical goal stated in the abstract. The approach stays within established theory and does not introduce fitted parameters or circular claims. The central limitation is the flatness requirement itself; the method simply does not apply to non-flat systems, and the authors scope the claims accordingly. Without the full derivations it is hard to inspect edge cases in the time parameterization or any floating-point effects when converting back to the original coordinates, but the abstract presents the mapping as exact. The citation pattern follows the standard references for sampling-based planning and differential flatness without obvious gaps. This is useful reading for anyone who already works with flat robots and needs faster kinodynamic options than current dynamic-propagation baselines. A practitioner or researcher looking for a drop-in improvement to RRT-style algorithms will find the implementation sketch and timing numbers directly relevant. The internal logic is consistent and the contribution is scoped tightly enough to merit referee time.

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces FLASK, a parallelized sampling-based kinodynamic planning framework for differentially flat systems (manipulators, ground/aerial vehicles). Differential flatness is used to obtain closed-form analytical solutions to two-point BVPs in the flat output space; trajectories are mapped back to the original state space for fast SIMD-parallel validation. The framework is claimed to be compatible with any sampling-based planner while delivering theoretical guarantees of probabilistic exhaustiveness and asymptotic optimality, with empirical validation showing planning times in the microseconds-to-milliseconds range on simulated benchmarks and real-robot experiments in cluttered/dynamic environments.

Significance. If the closed-form BVP solutions and associated guarantees hold, the work could meaningfully advance real-time kinodynamic planning for high-DOF systems by achieving speeds previously attainable only by geometric planners. The explicit conditioning on differential flatness, the reuse of standard sampling-based analyses (e.g., RRT*-style rewiring), and the provision of reproducible timing results on both simulation and hardware constitute clear strengths.

minor comments (3)

[Abstract] Abstract: the term 'probabilistic exhaustibility' is non-standard; it should be explicitly related to probabilistic completeness or exhaustiveness as used in the sampling-based planning literature (e.g., via a short definition or citation to Karaman & Frazzoli).
[Introduction / Problem Formulation] The manuscript should include a concise statement of the precise class of differentially flat systems for which closed-form BVP solutions exist without numerical integration or approximation, together with any assumptions on the flat outputs and their derivatives.
[Experiments] Experimental section: add a table or plot comparing planning time, success rate, and path cost against at least one standard kinodynamic baseline (e.g., kinodynamic RRT* with numerical steering) on the same benchmark instances to quantify the claimed speedup.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and positive review of our manuscript on FLASK. The recommendation for minor revision is appreciated, and we will prepare a revised version incorporating any editorial suggestions. Since no specific major comments were raised in the report, we provide a brief response below.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper derives its fast kinodynamic planning framework by invoking the established property of differential flatness (a standard result in nonlinear control theory, not introduced or redefined here) to obtain closed-form BVP solutions in flat output space. These solutions are then used as exact steering functions inside any sampling-based planner, inheriting probabilistic exhaustiveness and asymptotic optimality from the existing literature on RRT*-style algorithms. No equation in the provided text reduces a claimed performance metric or guarantee to a parameter fitted by the authors, nor does any self-citation serve as the sole load-bearing justification for the central claims. The argument chain remains self-contained against external benchmarks in differential flatness and sampling-based motion planning.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the domain assumption that the robot belongs to the class of differentially flat systems for which closed-form BVP solutions exist; no free parameters or new invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)

domain assumption The robot system is differentially flat
This property is invoked to obtain an analytical time-parameterized solution of the two-point boundary-value problem in flat output space.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5585 in / 1227 out tokens · 51724 ms · 2026-05-15T10:45:11.296621+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

108 extracted references · 108 canonical work pages

[1]

A Re- view of Motion Planning for Highway Autonomous Driving

L. Claussmann, M. Revilloud, D. Gruyer, and S. Glaser. “A Re- view of Motion Planning for Highway Autonomous Driving”. In: IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems21.5 (2020), pp. 1826–1848

work page 2020
[2]

Trajectory Planning for Quadrotor Swarms

W. H¨onig, J. A. Preiss, T. K. S. Kumar, G. S. Sukhatme, and N. Ayanian. “Trajectory Planning for Quadrotor Swarms”. In:IEEE Transactions on Robotics34.4 (2018), pp. 856–869

work page 2018
[3]

Swarm of micro flying robots in the wild

X. Zhou, X. Wen, Z. Wang, Y . Gao, H. Li, Q. Wang, T. Yang, H. Lu, Y . Cao, C. Xu, et al. “Swarm of micro flying robots in the wild”. In: Science Robotics7.66 (2022)

work page 2022
[4]

Lessons from the amazon picking challenge: Four aspects of building robotic systems

C. Eppner, S. H¨ofer, R. Jonschkowski, R. Mart´ın-Mart´ın, A. Sieverling, V . Wall, and O. Brock. “Lessons from the amazon picking challenge: Four aspects of building robotic systems.” In:Robotics: Science and Systems. 2016

work page 2016
[5]

Healthcare robotics

L. D. Riek. “Healthcare robotics”. In:Communications of the ACM 60.11 (2017), pp. 68–78

work page 2017
[6]

FEAST: A Flexible Mealtime-Assistance System Towards In-the-Wild Personalization

R. K. Jenamani, T. Silver, B. Dodson, S. Tong, A. Song, Y . Yang, Z. Liu, B. Howe, A. Whitneck, and T. Bhattacharjee. “FEAST: A Flexible Mealtime-Assistance System Towards In-the-Wild Personalization”. In:Robotics: Science and Systems. Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2025

work page 2025
[7]

Motions in Microsec- onds via Vectorized Sampling-Based Planning

W. Thomason, Z. Kingston, and L. E. Kavraki. “Motions in Microsec- onds via Vectorized Sampling-Based Planning”. In:IEEE Interna- tional Conference on Robotics and Automation. 2024, pp. 8749–8756

work page 2024
[8]

Collision-Affording Point Trees: SIMD-Amenable Nearest Neighbors for Fast Collision Checking

C. W. Ramsey, Z. Kingston, W. Thomason, and L. E. Kavraki. “Collision-Affording Point Trees: SIMD-Amenable Nearest Neighbors for Fast Collision Checking”. In:Robotics: Science and Systems. 2024

work page 2024
[9]

Randomized Kinodynamic Planning

S. M. LaValle and J. J. K. Jr. “Randomized Kinodynamic Planning”. In: The International Journal of Robotics Research20.5 (2001), pp. 378– 400

work page 2001
[10]

Randomized Kinody- namic Motion Planning with Moving Obstacles

D. Hsu, R. Kindel, J.-C. Latombe, and S. Rock. “Randomized Kinody- namic Motion Planning with Moving Obstacles”. In:The International Journal of Robotics Research21.3 (2002), pp. 233–255

work page 2002
[11]

S. M. LaValle.Planning algorithms. Cambridge University Press, 2006

work page 2006
[12]

Generation of collision-free trajectories for a quadrocopter fleet: A sequential convex programming approach

F. Augugliaro, A. P. Schoellig, and R. D’Andrea. “Generation of collision-free trajectories for a quadrocopter fleet: A sequential convex programming approach”. In:IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. 2012, pp. 1917–1922

work page 2012
[13]

Motion planning with sequential convex optimization and convex collision checking

J. Schulman, Y . Duan, J. Ho, A. Lee, I. Awwal, H. Bradlow, J. Pan, S. Patil, K. Goldberg, and P. Abbeel. “Motion planning with sequential convex optimization and convex collision checking”. In:The Interna- tional Journal of Robotics Research33.9 (2014), pp. 1251–1270

work page 2014
[14]

GuSTO: Guaran- teed Sequential Trajectory optimization via Sequential Convex Pro- gramming

R. Bonalli, A. Cauligi, A. Bylard, and M. Pavone. “GuSTO: Guaran- teed Sequential Trajectory optimization via Sequential Convex Pro- gramming”. In:International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 2019, pp. 6741–6747

work page 2019
[15]

Synthesis and stabilization of complex behaviors through online trajectory optimization

Y . Tassa, T. Erez, and E. Todorov. “Synthesis and stabilization of complex behaviors through online trajectory optimization”. In: IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. 2012, pp. 4906–4913

work page 2012
[16]

Crocoddyl: An Efficient and Versatile Framework for Multi-Contact Optimal Control

C. Mastalli, R. Budhiraja, W. Merkt, G. Saurel, B. Hammoud, M. Naveau, J. Carpentier, L. Righetti, S. Vijayakumar, and N. Mansard. “Crocoddyl: An Efficient and Versatile Framework for Multi-Contact Optimal Control”. In:IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 2020, pp. 2536–2542

work page 2020
[17]

iDb-A*: Iterative Search and Optimization for Optimal Kinodynamic Motion Planning

J. Ortiz-Haro, W. H ¨onig, V . N. Hartmann, and M. Toussaint. “iDb-A*: Iterative Search and Optimization for Optimal Kinodynamic Motion Planning”. In:IEEE Transactions on Robotics41 (2025)

work page 2025
[18]

Efficient constrained path planning via search in state lattices

M. Pivtoraiko and A. Kelly. “Efficient constrained path planning via search in state lattices”. In:International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence, Robotics, and Automation in Space. 2005, pp. 1–7

work page 2005
[19]

Kinodynamic motion planning with state lattice motion primitives

M. Pivtoraiko and A. Kelly. “Kinodynamic motion planning with state lattice motion primitives”. In:IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. 2011, pp. 2172–2179

work page 2011
[20]

Search-based planning for manipulation with motion primitives

B. J. Cohen, S. Chitta, and M. Likhachev. “Search-based planning for manipulation with motion primitives”. In:IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 2010, pp. 2902–2908

work page 2010
[21]

Search-based motion planning for quadrotors using linear quadratic minimum time control

S. Liu, N. Atanasov, K. Mohta, and V . Kumar. “Search-based motion planning for quadrotors using linear quadratic minimum time control”. In:IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. 2017, pp. 2872–2879

work page 2017
[22]

Search-Based Optimal Motion Planning for Automated Driving

Z. Ajanovic, B. Lacevic, B. Shyrokau, M. Stolz, and M. Horn. “Search-Based Optimal Motion Planning for Automated Driving”. In: IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. 2018, pp. 4523–4530. 19

work page 2018
[23]

Kinodynamic RRT*: Asymptotically optimal motion planning for robots with linear dynamics

D. J. Webb and J. van den Berg. “Kinodynamic RRT*: Asymptotically optimal motion planning for robots with linear dynamics”. In:IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 2013, pp. 5054– 5061

work page 2013
[24]

Optimal kinodynamic motion planning using incremental sampling-based methods

S. Karaman and E. Frazzoli. “Optimal kinodynamic motion planning using incremental sampling-based methods”. In:IEEE Conference on Decision and Control. 2010, pp. 7681–7687

work page 2010
[25]

Asymptotically Optimal Planning by Feasible Kinodynamic Planning in a State–Cost Space

K. Hauser and Y . Zhou. “Asymptotically Optimal Planning by Feasible Kinodynamic Planning in a State–Cost Space”. In:IEEE Transactions on Robotics32.6 (2016), pp. 1431–1443

work page 2016
[26]

Asymptotically optimal sampling-based kinodynamic planning

Y . Li, Z. Littlefield, and K. E. Bekris. “Asymptotically optimal sampling-based kinodynamic planning”. In:The International Journal of Robotics Research35.5 (2016), pp. 528–564

work page 2016
[27]

KDF: Kino- dynamic Motion Planning via Geometric Sampling-Based Algorithms and Funnel Control

C. K. Verginis, D. V . Dimarogonas, and L. E. Kavraki. “KDF: Kino- dynamic Motion Planning via Geometric Sampling-Based Algorithms and Funnel Control”. In:IEEE Transactions on Robotics39.2 (2023), pp. 978–997

work page 2023
[28]

Kinodynamic motion planning on roadmaps in dynamic environments

J. van den Berg and M. Overmars. “Kinodynamic motion planning on roadmaps in dynamic environments”. In:IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. 2007, pp. 4253–4258

work page 2007
[29]

J. C. Butcher.Numerical Methods for Ordinary Differential Equations. John Wiley & Sons, 2016

work page 2016
[30]

LQR-RRT*: Optimal sampling-based motion planning with automati- cally derived extension heuristics

A. Perez, R. Platt, G. Konidaris, L. Kaelbling, and T. Lozano-Perez. “LQR-RRT*: Optimal sampling-based motion planning with automati- cally derived extension heuristics”. In:IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 2012, pp. 2537–2542

work page 2012
[31]

RRT- CoLearn: towards kinodynamic planning without numerical trajectory optimization

W. J. Wolfslag, M. Bharatheesha, T. M. Moerland, and M. Wisse. “RRT- CoLearn: towards kinodynamic planning without numerical trajectory optimization”. In:IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters3.3 (2018), pp. 1655–1662

work page 2018
[32]

RL-RRT: Kinodynamic motion planning via learning reachability estimators from RL policies

H.-T. L. Chiang, J. Hsu, M. Fiser, L. Tapia, and A. Faust. “RL-RRT: Kinodynamic motion planning via learning reachability estimators from RL policies”. In:IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters4.4 (2019), pp. 4298–4305

work page 2019
[33]

Sampling-based kinodynamic motion planning using a neural network controller

D. Zheng and P. Tsiotras. “Sampling-based kinodynamic motion planning using a neural network controller”. In:AIAA Scitech Forum. 2021, p. 1754

work page 2021
[34]

Differential flatness of mechanical control systems: A catalog of prototype systems

R. M. Murray, M. Rathinam, and W. Sluis. “Differential flatness of mechanical control systems: A catalog of prototype systems”. In: ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition. 1995, pp. 349–357

work page 1995
[35]

Minimum snap trajectory generation and control for quadrotors

D. Mellinger and V . Kumar. “Minimum snap trajectory generation and control for quadrotors”. In:IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 2011, pp. 2520–2525

work page 2011
[36]

H. K. Khalil.Nonlinear systems. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice- Hall, 2002

work page 2002
[37]

Trajectory generation and control for precise aggressive maneuvers with quadrotors

D. Mellinger, N. Michael, and V . Kumar. “Trajectory generation and control for precise aggressive maneuvers with quadrotors”. In:The International Journal of Robotics Research31.5 (2012), pp. 664–674

work page 2012
[38]

Curobo: Parallelized collision-free robot motion generation

B. Sundaralingam, S. K. S. Hari, A. Fishman, C. Garrett, K. Van Wyk, V . Blukis, A. Millane, H. Oleynikova, A. Handa, F. Ramos, et al. “Curobo: Parallelized collision-free robot motion generation”. In:2023 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. IEEE. 2023, pp. 8112–8119

work page 2023
[39]

Optimal sampling-based motion planning under differential constraints: The driftless case

E. Schmerling, L. Janson, and M. Pavone. “Optimal sampling-based motion planning under differential constraints: The driftless case”. In: IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 2015, pp. 2368–2375

work page 2015
[40]

Analysis of prob- abilistic roadmaps for path planning

L. Kavraki, M. Kolountzakis, and J. -C. Latombe. “Analysis of prob- abilistic roadmaps for path planning”. In:IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation14.1 (1998), pp. 166–171

work page 1998
[41]

RRT-connect: An efficient approach to single-query path planning

J. J. Kuffner and S. M. LaValle. “RRT-connect: An efficient approach to single-query path planning”. In:IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. V ol. 2. 2000, pp. 995–1001

work page 2000
[42]

Kinodynamic planning

E. Schmerling and M. Pavone. “Kinodynamic planning”. In:Encyclo- pedia of Robotics. Springer, 2019

work page 2019
[43]

Decoupled multiagent path planning via incremental sequential convex programming

Y . Chen, M. Cutler, and J. P. How. “Decoupled multiagent path planning via incremental sequential convex programming”. In:IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 2015

work page 2015
[44]

ALTRO: A Fast Solver for Constrained Trajectory Optimization

T. A. Howell, B. E. Jackson, and Z. Manchester. “ALTRO: A Fast Solver for Constrained Trajectory Optimization”. In:IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. 2019, pp. 7674–7679

work page 2019
[45]

A tutorial on Newton methods for constrained trajec- tory optimization and relations to SLAM, Gaussian Process smoothing, optimal control, and probabilistic inference

M. Toussaint. “A tutorial on Newton methods for constrained trajec- tory optimization and relations to SLAM, Gaussian Process smoothing, optimal control, and probabilistic inference”. In:Geometric and Numerical Foundations of Movements(2017), pp. 361–392

work page 2017
[46]

Whole-body trajectory optimization for robot multi- modal locomotion

G. L’Erario, G. Nava, G. Romualdi, F. Bergonti, V . Razza, S. Dafarra, and D. Pucci. “Whole-body trajectory optimization for robot multi- modal locomotion”. In:IEEE-RAS 21st International Conference on Humanoid Robots. 2022, pp. 651–658

work page 2022
[47]

High Accuracy Aerial Maneuvers on Legged Robots using Variational Inte- grator Discretized Trajectory Optimization

S. Beck, C. Nguyen, T. Duong, N. Atanasov, and Q. Nguyen. “High Accuracy Aerial Maneuvers on Legged Robots using Variational Inte- grator Discretized Trajectory Optimization”. In:IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 2025, pp. 10253–10260

work page 2025
[48]

Motion planning around obstacles with convex optimization

T. Marcucci, M. Petersen, D. von Wrangel, and R. Tedrake. “Motion planning around obstacles with convex optimization”. In:Science Robotics8.84 (2023)

work page 2023
[49]

Using Graphs of Convex Sets to Guide Nonconvex Trajectory Optimization

D. von Wrangel and R. Tedrake. “Using Graphs of Convex Sets to Guide Nonconvex Trajectory Optimization”. In:IEEE/RSJ In- ternational Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. 2024, pp. 9863–9870

work page 2024
[50]

Towards Tight Convex Relaxations for Contact-Rich Manipulation

B. P. Graesdal, S. Y . C. Chia, T. Marcucci, S. Morozov, A. Amice, P. Parrilo, and R. Tedrake. “Towards Tight Convex Relaxations for Contact-Rich Manipulation”. In:Robotics: Science and Systems. Delft, Netherlands, 2024

work page 2024
[51]

Srmp: Search- based robot motion planning library

I. Mishani, Y . Shaoul, R. Natarajan, J. Li, and M. Likhachev. “SRMP: Search-Based Robot Motion Planning Library”. In:arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.25352(2025)

work page arXiv 2025
[52]

A formal basis for the heuristic determination of minimum cost paths

P. E. Hart, N. J. Nilsson, and B. Raphael. “A formal basis for the heuristic determination of minimum cost paths”. In:IEEE Transac- tions on Systems Science and Cybernetics4.2 (1968), pp. 100–107

work page 1968
[53]

Sampling-Based Motion Planning: A Comparative Review

A. Orthey, C. Chamzas, and L. E. Kavraki. “Sampling-Based Motion Planning: A Comparative Review”. In:Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems7.1 (July 2024), pp. 285–310

work page 2024
[54]

Parallel Simulation of Contact and Actuation for Soft Growing Robots

Y . Gao, L. Chen, P. Bhovad, S. Wang, Z. Kingston, and L. H. Blumenschein. “Parallel Simulation of Contact and Actuation for Soft Growing Robots”. In:arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.15180(2025)

work page arXiv 2025
[55]

Robot Motion Planning in Learned Latent Spaces

B. Ichter and M. Pavone. “Robot Motion Planning in Learned Latent Spaces”. In:IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters4.3 (2019), pp. 2407–2414

work page 2019
[56]

MPC-MPNet: Model- Predictive Motion Planning Networks for Fast, Near-Optimal Planning Under Kinodynamic Constraints

L. Li, Y . Miao, A. H. Qureshi, and M. C. Yip. “MPC-MPNet: Model- Predictive Motion Planning Networks for Fast, Near-Optimal Planning Under Kinodynamic Constraints”. In:IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters6.3 (2021), pp. 4496–4503

work page 2021
[57]

iDb-RRT: Sampling-based Kinodynamic Motion Planning with Motion Primitives and Trajectory Optimization

J. Ortiz-Haro, W. H ¨onig, V . N. Hartmann, M. Toussaint, and L. Righetti. “iDb-RRT: Sampling-based Kinodynamic Motion Planning with Motion Primitives and Trajectory Optimization”. In:IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. 2024, pp. 10702–10709

work page 2024
[58]

PINSAT: Parallelized Interleaving of Graph Search and Trajectory Optimization for Kinodynamic Motion Planning

R. Natarajan, S. Mukherjee, H. Choset, and M. Likhachev. “PINSAT: Parallelized Interleaving of Graph Search and Trajectory Optimization for Kinodynamic Motion Planning”. In:IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. 2024

work page 2024
[59]

Torque-Limited Manipulation Planning through Contact by Interleaving Graph Search and Trajectory Optimization

R. Natarajan, G. L. Johnston, N. Simaan, M. Likhachev, and H. Choset. “Torque-Limited Manipulation Planning through Contact by Interleaving Graph Search and Trajectory Optimization”. In:IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 2023

work page 2023
[60]

Interleaving Graph Search and Trajectory Optimization for Aggressive Quadrotor Flight

R. Natarajan, H. Choset, and M. Likhachev. “Interleaving Graph Search and Trajectory Optimization for Aggressive Quadrotor Flight”. In:IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters6.3 (2021), pp. 5357–5364

work page 2021
[61]

Sampling- based optimal kinodynamic planning with motion primitives

B. Sakcak, L. Bascetta, G. Ferretti, and M. Prandini. “Sampling- based optimal kinodynamic planning with motion primitives”. In: Autonomous Robots43.7 (2019), pp. 1715–1732

work page 2019
[62]

Asymptotically optimal kinodynamic planning using bundles of edges

R. Shome and L. E. Kavraki. “Asymptotically optimal kinodynamic planning using bundles of edges”. In:IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 2021, pp. 9988–9994

work page 2021
[63]

BITKOMO: Combining Sampling and Optimization for Fast Con- vergence in Optimal Motion Planning

J. Kamat, J. Ortiz-Haro, M. Toussaint, F. T. Pokorny, and A. Orthey. “BITKOMO: Combining Sampling and Optimization for Fast Con- vergence in Optimal Motion Planning”. In:IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. 2022, pp. 4492–4497

work page 2022
[64]

Regionally accelerated batch informed trees (RABIT*): A framework to integrate local information into optimal path planning

S. Choudhury, J. D. Gammell, T. D. Barfoot, S. S. Srinivasa, and S. Scherer. “Regionally accelerated batch informed trees (RABIT*): A framework to integrate local information into optimal path planning”. In:IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 2016, pp. 4207–4214

work page 2016
[65]

Joint sampling and trajectory optimization over graphs for online motion planning

K. V . Alwala and M. Mukadam. “Joint sampling and trajectory optimization over graphs for online motion planning”. In:IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. 2021, pp. 4700–4707

work page 2021
[66]

A New Approach to Time-Optimal Path Parameterization Based on Reachability Analysis

H. Pham and Q. -C. Pham. “A New Approach to Time-Optimal Path Parameterization Based on Reachability Analysis”. In:IEEE Transactions on Robotics34.3 (2018), pp. 645–659. 20

work page 2018
[67]

Jerk-limited Real-time Trajectory Generation with Arbitrary Target States

L. Berscheid and T. Kr ¨oger. “Jerk-limited Real-time Trajectory Generation with Arbitrary Target States”. In:Robotics: Science and Systems(2021)

work page 2021
[68]

A real-time framework for kinodynamic planning in dynamic environments with application to quadrotor obstacle avoidance

R. E. Allen and M. Pavone. “A real-time framework for kinodynamic planning in dynamic environments with application to quadrotor obstacle avoidance”. In:Robotics and Autonomous Systems115 (2019), pp. 174–193

work page 2019
[69]

Flat-RRT*: A sampling- based optimal trajectory planner for differentially flat vehicles with constrained dynamics

L. Bascetta, I. M. Arrieta, and M. Prandini. “Flat-RRT*: A sampling- based optimal trajectory planner for differentially flat vehicles with constrained dynamics”. In:IFAC-PapersOnLine50.1 (2017), pp. 6965– 6970

work page 2017
[70]

Dynamically Feasible Task Space Planning for Underactuated Aerial Manipulators

J. Welde, J. Paulos, and V . Kumar. “Dynamically Feasible Task Space Planning for Underactuated Aerial Manipulators”. In:IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters6.2 (2021), pp. 3232–3239

work page 2021
[71]

Efficient Sampling-based Multirotors Kinodynamic Planning with Fast Regional Optimization and Post Refining

H. Ye, N. Pan, Q. Wang, C. Xu, and F. Gao. “Efficient Sampling-based Multirotors Kinodynamic Planning with Fast Regional Optimization and Post Refining”. In:IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intel- ligent Robots and Systems. 2022, pp. 3356–3363

work page 2022
[72]

Differential Flatness-Based Trajectory Planning for Small Fixed-Wing UA Vs

Y . Wang, W. Zeng, Y . Peng, Q. Yang, and J. Zhou. “Differential Flatness-Based Trajectory Planning for Small Fixed-Wing UA Vs”. In:International Conference on Autonomous Unmanned Systems. Springer. 2024, pp. 360–369

work page 2024
[73]

Exact and efficient local planning for orbitally flat systems within the RRT* framework

M. Seemann and K. Janschek. “Exact and efficient local planning for orbitally flat systems within the RRT* framework”. In:International Conference on Control Automation Robotics & Vision. IEEE. 2014, pp. 1631–1636

work page 2014
[74]

An efficient spatial-temporal trajectory planner for autonomous vehicles in unstructured environments

Z. Han, Y . Wu, T. Li, L. Zhang, L. Pei, L. Xu, C. Li, C. Ma, C. Xu, S. Shen, et al. “An efficient spatial-temporal trajectory planner for autonomous vehicles in unstructured environments”. In: IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems25.2 (2023), pp. 1797–1814

work page 2023
[75]

Differential flatness-based trajectory planning for multiple unmanned aerial vehicles using mixed- integer linear programming

Y . Hao, A. Davari, and A. Manesh. “Differential flatness-based trajectory planning for multiple unmanned aerial vehicles using mixed- integer linear programming”. In:American Control Conference. 2005, pp. 104–109

work page 2005
[76]

Optimal control of differen- tially flat systems is surprisingly easy

L. E. Beaver and A. A. Malikopoulos. “Optimal control of differen- tially flat systems is surprisingly easy”. In:Automatica159 (2024), p. 111404

work page 2024
[77]

Sampling-based trajectory (re) planning for differentially flat systems: Application to a 3D gantry crane

M. N. Vu, M. Schwegel, C. Hartl-Nesic, and A. Kugi. “Sampling-based trajectory (re) planning for differentially flat systems: Application to a 3D gantry crane”. In:IFAC-PapersOnLine55.38 (2022), pp. 33–40

work page 2022
[78]

A little more, a lot better: Improving path quality by a path-merging algorithm

B. Raveh, A. Enosh, and D. Halperin. “A little more, a lot better: Improving path quality by a path-merging algorithm”. In:IEEE Transactions on Robotics27.2 (2011), pp. 365–371

work page 2011
[79]

Probabilistic roadmap methods are embarrassingly parallel

N. M. Amato and L. K. Dale. “Probabilistic roadmap methods are embarrassingly parallel”. In:IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. V ol. 1. 1999, pp. 688–694

work page 1999
[80]

Parallel sampling-based motion planning with superlinear speedup

J. Ichnowski and R. Alterovitz. “Parallel sampling-based motion planning with superlinear speedup”. In:IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. IEEE. 2012, pp. 1206– 1212

work page 2012

Showing first 80 references.