pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.07835 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-08 · 💻 cs.RO · cs.MA

Recognition: no theorem link

Many-to-Many Multi-Agent Pickup and Delivery

Ethan Schneider , Jingkai Chen , Tianyi GU , Kunlei Lian , Seth Hutchinson , Sonia Chernova
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-11 02:59 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.RO cs.MA
keywords multi-agent pickup and deliverymany-to-many assignmentwarehouse automationrobot task planningmulti-robot systemsNP-hard optimizationsimulation evaluation
0
0 comments X

The pith

M2M algorithm solves many-to-many multi-agent pickup and delivery by assigning flexible SKU locations and matches or beats prior methods in warehouse simulations.

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

The paper introduces an algorithm to handle pickup and delivery tasks where each item can be taken from or placed in any of several locations rather than one fixed spot. This many-to-many setup turns the assignment of robots to tasks into a complex four-dimensional problem that standard one-to-one methods cannot address directly. The authors test two versions of their method in long-running simulations that mimic continuous warehouse operations with different numbers of robots and item densities. Results indicate the new approach finishes as many or more tasks than earlier techniques while respecting movement and safety rules. A reader would care because real automated warehouses rarely have single fixed spots for every item, so better handling of flexible locations could raise overall productivity without adding more robots.

Core claim

The central claim is that the M2M algorithm, which minimizes estimated task durations (and a variant that also factors in SKU distribution), effectively solves the many-to-many MAPD problem. In eight-hour simulations across varied warehouse layouts and inventory densities, it matches or exceeds the performance of previous state-of-the-art methods by completing up to twenty-two thousand additional tasks on average.

What carries the argument

The M2M algorithm that reduces the NP-hard four-dimensional assignment problem for SKUs with multiple possible pickup and delivery locations into sequential decisions that balance robot travel times and task completion.

Load-bearing premise

The simulated eight-hour warehouse operations with varying inventory densities accurately reflect the continuous task arrival, safety constraints, and changing conditions found in actual automated warehouses.

What would settle it

A side-by-side run of M2M against the prior state-of-the-art method in a real warehouse over eight hours, measuring the total number of completed pickup-and-delivery tasks.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.07835 by Ethan Schneider, Jingkai Chen, Kunlei Lian, Seth Hutchinson, Sonia Chernova, Tianyi GU.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: (a) Multi-location inventory management is common practice in warehouse settings, where multiple source and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Overview of M2M method and M2M-wSKU variant. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The restricted map contains long aisles with a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Partial view of our three simulated warehouse layouts. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Comparison of the rolling mean (solid) and std-dev (shaded region) of throughput (tasks/min.) metric reported across [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Multi-robot systems in automated warehouses must manage continuous streams of pickup-and-delivery tasks while ensuring efficiency and safety. Prior work on Multi-Agent Pickup-and-Delivery (MAPD) has largely focused on the one-to-one variant, where each task has a fixed pickup and delivery location. In contrast, real warehouses often present many-to-many MAPD scenarios, where items, tracked by stock keeping unit (SKU) identifiers, can be retrieved from or stored at multiple locations, resulting in an NP-hard four-dimensional assignment problem. To solve the many-to-many MAPD problem, we contribute our algorithm: Many-to-Many Multi-Agent Pickup and Delivery (M2M). We experiment with two variants of our algorithm: one that minimizes estimated task durations (M2M), and one which incorporates SKU distribution into the objective function (M2M-wSKU). Simulation results over 8-hour warehouse operations show that our method consistently matches or outperforms prior state of the art, with M2M completing up to 22,000 more tasks on average across different environments and warehouse inventory densities.

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.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces the M2M algorithm (and its M2M-wSKU variant) for the many-to-many variant of Multi-Agent Pickup and Delivery (MAPD) in automated warehouses. Unlike prior one-to-one MAPD work, the setting allows items identified by SKU to be retrieved from or delivered to multiple locations, yielding an NP-hard four-dimensional assignment problem. The authors propose two objective functions—one minimizing estimated task durations and one incorporating SKU distribution—and evaluate them via 8-hour warehouse simulations across environments and inventory densities, claiming consistent matching or outperformance of prior state-of-the-art methods with average gains of up to 22,000 completed tasks.

Significance. If the empirical claims are substantiated with reproducible experimental protocols, the work addresses a practically relevant generalization of MAPD that better matches real warehouse operations. Demonstrating higher task throughput under continuous task streams would be a useful contribution to multi-robot coordination in logistics. The explicit framing as a 4D assignment problem and the two algorithmic variants are clear strengths.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4] §4 (Simulation Results): The central claim that M2M 'consistently matches or outperforms' prior SOTA with up to 22,000 additional tasks completed is load-bearing for the paper's contribution, yet the text supplies no description of baseline implementations, number of independent runs, variance measures, or statistical tests. Without these, the reported average improvement cannot be assessed for reliability or robustness across inventory densities.
  2. [§3] §3 (Algorithm Description): The M2M procedure for solving the four-dimensional assignment problem is presented at a high level without pseudocode, complexity analysis, or explicit handling of safety constraints and continuous task arrival. This omission prevents verification that the method scales to the claimed 8-hour warehouse scenarios.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract and introduction use 'up to 22,000 more tasks on average' without clarifying whether this is an absolute count or normalized by environment size; a precise definition would improve clarity.
  2. [§2] Notation for the four-dimensional assignment (e.g., how SKU locations map to the cost tensor) is introduced but not consistently referenced in the experimental section; adding a short table of symbols would aid readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback. We address each major comment below and will incorporate the suggested clarifications into the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§4] §4 (Simulation Results): The central claim that M2M 'consistently matches or outperforms' prior SOTA with up to 22,000 additional tasks completed is load-bearing for the paper's contribution, yet the text supplies no description of baseline implementations, number of independent runs, variance measures, or statistical tests. Without these, the reported average improvement cannot be assessed for reliability or robustness across inventory densities.

    Authors: We agree that the current text lacks sufficient experimental protocol details to allow full assessment of the reported gains. In the revision we will expand Section 4 to describe the baseline implementations (including how prior one-to-one MAPD methods were adapted to the many-to-many setting), state the number of independent runs per configuration, report variance (standard deviation) alongside the averages, and include statistical significance tests (paired t-tests) comparing M2M variants against each baseline across inventory densities. These additions will be placed in the main text with supporting tables moved to an appendix if space is limited. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§3] §3 (Algorithm Description): The M2M procedure for solving the four-dimensional assignment problem is presented at a high level without pseudocode, complexity analysis, or explicit handling of safety constraints and continuous task arrival. This omission prevents verification that the method scales to the claimed 8-hour warehouse scenarios.

    Authors: We acknowledge that Section 3 presents the algorithm at a high level. The revised manuscript will include pseudocode for the core M2M assignment routine, a complexity analysis (the 4D assignment is solved via a polynomial-time heuristic that is invoked periodically), and explicit discussion of how safety constraints are enforced through the underlying MAPD collision-avoidance layer and how continuous task arrivals are accommodated by re-solving the assignment at fixed time intervals. These additions will directly address scalability verification for the 8-hour simulations. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper introduces the M2M algorithm to address the many-to-many MAPD problem (framed as a four-dimensional assignment task) and validates performance via 8-hour warehouse simulations across environments and inventory densities. No equations, parameter-fitting steps, self-definitional reductions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the provided abstract or description. The outperformance claims are empirical comparisons to prior MAPD methods rather than any derivation that reduces to its own inputs by construction. This is a standard algorithmic contribution with external benchmarking.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

The contribution is presented as an algorithmic solution to a four-dimensional assignment problem; the abstract lists no free parameters, mathematical axioms, or newly postulated entities.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5493 in / 1059 out tokens · 36155 ms · 2026-05-11T02:59:33.337345+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

24 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Suboptimal variants of the conflict-based search algorithm for the multi-agent pathfinding problem,

    M. Barer, G. Sharon, R. Stern, and A. Felner, “Suboptimal variants of the conflict-based search algorithm for the multi-agent pathfinding problem,” inProceedings of the international symposium on combi- natorial Search, vol. 5, no. 1, 2014, pp. 19–27

    work page 2014

  2. [2]

    Multidimensional binary search trees used for asso- ciative searching,

    J. L. Bentley, “Multidimensional binary search trees used for asso- ciative searching,”Communications of the ACM, vol. 18, no. 9, pp. 509–517, 1975

    work page 1975

  3. [3]

    Dynamic pickup and delivery problems,

    G. Berbeglia, J.-F. Cordeau, and G. Laporte, “Dynamic pickup and delivery problems,”European journal of operational research, vol. 202, no. 1, pp. 8–15, 2010

    work page 2010

  4. [4]

    Integrated task assignment and path planning for capacitated multi- agent pickup and delivery,

    Z. Chen, J. Alonso-Mora, X. Bai, D. D. Harabor, and P. J. Stuckey, “Integrated task assignment and path planning for capacitated multi- agent pickup and delivery,”IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 5816–5823, 2021

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    Multiple hungarian method for k-assignment problem,

    B. Gabrov ˇsek, T. Novak, J. Povh, D. Rupnik Poklukar, and J.ˇZerovnik, “Multiple hungarian method for k-assignment problem,”Mathematics, vol. 8, no. 11, p. 2050, 2020

    work page 2050

  6. [6]

    A formal analysis and taxonomy of task allocation in multi-robot systems,

    B. P. Gerkey and M. J. Matari ´c, “A formal analysis and taxonomy of task allocation in multi-robot systems,”The International journal of robotics research, vol. 23, no. 9, pp. 939–954, 2004

    work page 2004

  7. [7]

    A multi- label a* algorithm for multi-agent pathfinding,

    F. Grenouilleau, W.-J. Van Hoeve, and J. N. Hooker, “A multi- label a* algorithm for multi-agent pathfinding,” inProceedings of the international conference on automated planning and scheduling, vol. 29, 2019, pp. 181–185

    work page 2019

  8. [8]

    Gutin and D

    G. Gutin and D. Karapetyan,Greedy Like Algorithms for the Traveling Salesman and Multidimensional Assignment Problems. IntechOpen, 11 2008, pp. 291–304

    work page 2008

  9. [9]

    Deploying ten thousand robots: Scalable imitation learning for lifelong multi-agent path finding,

    H. Jiang, Y . Wang, R. Veerapaneni, T. Duhan, G. Sartoretti, and J. Li, “Deploying ten thousand robots: Scalable imitation learning for lifelong multi-agent path finding,” in2025 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). IEEE, 2025, pp. 1–7

    work page 2025

  10. [10]

    Optimization by simulated annealing,

    S. Kirkpatrick, C. D. Gelatt Jr, and M. P. Vecchi, “Optimization by simulated annealing,”science, vol. 220, no. 4598, pp. 671–680, 1983

    work page 1983

  11. [11]

    A comprehensive taxonomy for multi-robot task allocation,

    G. A. Korsah, A. Stentz, and M. B. Dias, “A comprehensive taxonomy for multi-robot task allocation,”The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 32, no. 12, pp. 1495–1512, 2013

    work page 2013

  12. [12]

    The hungarian method for the assignment problem,

    H. W. Kuhn, “The hungarian method for the assignment problem,” Naval research logistics quarterly, vol. 2, no. 1-2, pp. 83–97, 1955

    work page 1955

  13. [13]

    Lifelong multi-agent path finding in large-scale warehouses,

    J. Li, A. Tinka, S. Kiesel, J. W. Durham, T. S. Kumar, and S. Koenig, “Lifelong multi-agent path finding in large-scale warehouses,” in Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 35, no. 13, 2021, pp. 11 272–11 281

    work page 2021

  14. [14]

    Task and path planning for multi- agent pickup and delivery,

    M. Liu, H. Ma, J. Li, and S. Koenig, “Task and path planning for multi- agent pickup and delivery,” inProceedings of the International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS), 2019

    work page 2019

  15. [15]

    Searching with consistent prioritization for multi-agent path finding,

    H. Ma, D. Harabor, P. J. Stuckey, J. Li, and S. Koenig, “Searching with consistent prioritization for multi-agent path finding,” inProceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, vol. 33, no. 01, 2019, pp. 7643–7650

    work page 2019

  16. [16]

    Lifelong multi-agent path finding for online pickup and delivery tasks,

    H. Ma, J. Li, T. S. Kumar, and S. Koenig, “Lifelong multi-agent path finding for online pickup and delivery tasks,” inProceedings of the International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS), ser. AAMAS, 2017, p. 837–845

    work page 2017

  17. [17]

    A survey of adaptive large neighborhood search algorithms and applications,

    S. T. W. Mara, R. Norcahyo, P. Jodiawan, L. Lusiantoro, and A. P. Rifai, “A survey of adaptive large neighborhood search algorithms and applications,”Computers & Operations Research, vol. 146, p. 105903, 2022

    work page 2022

  18. [18]

    An adaptive large neighborhood search heuristic for the pickup and delivery problem with time windows,

    S. Ropke and D. Pisinger, “An adaptive large neighborhood search heuristic for the pickup and delivery problem with time windows,” Transportation science, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 455–472, 2006

    work page 2006

  19. [19]

    Conflict-based search for optimal multi-agent pathfinding,

    G. Sharon, R. Stern, A. Felner, and N. R. Sturtevant, “Conflict-based search for optimal multi-agent pathfinding,”Artificial intelligence, vol. 219, pp. 40–66, 2015

    work page 2015

  20. [20]

    A new local search algorithm providing high quality solu- tions to vehicle routing problems,

    P. Shaw, “A new local search algorithm providing high quality solu- tions to vehicle routing problems,”APES Group, Dept of Computer Science, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland, UK, vol. 46, 1997

    work page 1997

  21. [21]

    Using constraint programming and local search methods to solve vehicle routing problems,

    ——, “Using constraint programming and local search methods to solve vehicle routing problems,” inInternational conference on prin- ciples and practice of constraint programming. Springer, 1998, pp. 417–431

    work page 1998

  22. [22]

    Cooperative pathfinding,

    D. Silver, “Cooperative pathfinding,” inProceedings of the aaai con- ference on artificial intelligence and interactive digital entertainment, vol. 1, no. 1, 2005, pp. 117–122

    work page 2005

  23. [23]

    Integer programming models for the multidimensional assignment problem with star costs,

    J. L. Walteros, C. V ogiatzis, E. L. Pasiliao, and P. M. Pardalos, “Integer programming models for the multidimensional assignment problem with star costs,”European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 235, no. 3, pp. 553–568, 2014

    work page 2014

  24. [24]

    Multi-goal multi-agent pickup and delivery,

    Q. Xu, J. Li, S. Koenig, and H. Ma, “Multi-goal multi-agent pickup and delivery,” in2022 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelli- gent Robots and Systems (IROS). IEEE, 2022, pp. 9964–9971

    work page 2022