Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 32 references

Learning Spatiotemporal Decision Priors for Efficient Path Planning under Partial Observability

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A local 11x11 view can supply the directional priors that global heuristics provide, making partially observable planning faster without sacrificing path quality.

desk verdict A useful local-prior planner with a solid deterministic result, but the 'heterogeneous planners' claim is not supported by the experiments as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.22166 v1 pith:F2VNK65N submitted 2026-07-24 cs.RO cs.AI

Yi Liu , Hongda Zhang , Leyao Zou , Chunlei Meng , Ziqing Zhou , Yuning Chen , Zhuo Zou , Lida Xu
show 2 more authors
Zhongxue Gan Chun Ouyang
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.ROcs.AI
keywords pathplanningpartialobservabilityimitationlearningspatiotemporalpriorsantcolonyoptimizationA*searchgridnavigationdecision
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper claims that an agent navigating with only an 11x11 local view can recover the directional preferences a global planner would use, by learning them from expert trajectories. ImiPath encodes the local obstacle layout, projected start and goal directions, and recency-weighted motion history into a compact observation, and trains STAPNet to predict expert-like action distributions. Those distributions are injected into classical planners — A* and ant-colony optimization — as directional guidance instead of being used as a standalone controller. If the claim holds, partially observable grid navigation can match near-global path quality while expanding far fewer nodes, across map sizes, dynamic scenes, and a physical magnetic microrobot.

What carries the argument

The key machinery is the local spatiotemporal observation — four aligned 11x11 matrices encoding obstacle occupancy, the agent's start and goal as projected boundary cues, and recent trajectory history with exponential temporal decay — together with STAPNet, a cross-attention policy network whose temporal-history branch queries the spatial branch and outputs a distribution over eight neighbor actions. The prior enters planners through two fusion rules: a logarithmic probability term subtracted in A*'s node evaluation, and a multiplicative probability factor in the ant-colony transition probability. Together they convert a purely local view into an expert-informed directional bias that reduce

What would settle it

Train STAPNet on maps whose local obstacle statistics differ sharply from the test maps (e.g., open rooms in training, narrow corridors in testing), then compare ImiPath-guided A* against plain A* Local on the test corridors: if node expansions and success rate do not improve over A* Local, the prior has overfit to training layout statistics rather than learned transferable local decision knowledge.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a policy network trained on 11x11 local windows extracted from globally optimal expert trajectories can serve as a reusable spatiotemporal decision prior for partially observable planning. The learned policy outputs a distribution over eight movement directions, and ImiPath fuses that distribution into the search: for A*, as a log-probability bonus in the node evaluation function; for ant-colony optimization, as a multiplicative factor in the state-transition rule. Under an 11x11 field of view, this reduces node expansions substantially on maps larger than the view (e.g., about 90 versus 243 explored nodes on 30x30 maps) while maintaining 100% success and eq

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that an 11x11 window showing obstacles, projected start and goal directions, and recency-weighted trajectory history is rich enough for a policy trained on globally informed expert paths to produce direction preferences that transfer to unseen maps and dynamic scenarios; if that local view is too impoverished, the learned prior collapses into a simple goal-direction bias and the efficiency gains disappear.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • ImiPath-guided A* keeps 100% success on maps from 15x15 to 30x30 under an 11x11 field of view, with the largest map showing about 90 explored nodes versus 243 for local A* and a shorter average path.
  • The same trained prior, fused into ant-colony optimization as a transition bias, reaches 100% success on every tested map scale with path quality that matches or beats the best stochastic baselines.
  • Prior inference takes milliseconds, making online closed-loop replanning feasible in dynamic environments; the dynamic-scenario tests show 100% success with at most 15 explored nodes.
  • Because the prior comes from local observations rather than planner-specific data structures, the same network can guide both deterministic and stochastic planners without retraining or parameter reselection.
  • The framework transfers from simulation to a physical magnetic microrobot, completing navigation from sequential local observations in a constrained channel environment.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper: the same observation encoder could bias sampling in continuous planners such as RRT-style algorithms by turning the predicted action distribution into a non-uniform sampling density, since the prior is defined on directions rather than grid cells.
  • Beyond the paper: if the trajectory-history channel is what suppresses re-exploration, the idea could extend to multi-robot coordination, where each agent's recent history biases its search away from regions teammates just covered.
  • Beyond the paper: sweeping the field-of-view size at test time would separate true locality from goal-direction leakage — if gains persist at 7x7 or 9x9 views, the prior is genuinely local; if they require the full 11x11, part of the signal is the projected goal cue.
  • Beyond the paper: replacing the grid observation with a local cost patch plus bearing-to-goal would test whether the mechanism transfers to non-grid costmaps; the paper does not report such an experiment.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes ImiPath, an imitation-learning framework for path planning under partial observability. STAPNet is trained on expert demonstrations generated by PFACO and A* Global, using an 11×11 spatiotemporal observation that encodes obstacle layout, projected start/goal directions, and temporally decayed trajectory history. At inference, the predicted action distribution is fused into downstream planners: as a bias term in A*-style evaluation (Eq. 18) and as a multiplicative factor in ACO transition probabilities (Eq. 19). Experiments compare stochastic variants (ImiPath_PFACO) against ACO baselines and deterministic variants (ImiPath_A*_Local) against A* Local on maps of several sizes, with additional dynamic-scenario and magnetic-microrobot demonstrations. The main reported results are that the deterministic variant reduces explored nodes on large maps while preserving 100% success rate, and that the stochastic variant achieves competitive or better path quality than PFACO.

Significance. If the deterministic node-reduction results replicate, the paper makes a useful empirical contribution: a learned local prior can partially substitute for global heuristics in partially observable grid navigation. The use of Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, 100% success rates across map scales, and a physical robot validation are strengths. However, the central novelty claim — that ImiPath learns planner-agnostic priors reusable across heterogeneous planning paradigms — is not established by the reported experiments. The stochastic variant is only fused into the same PFACO algorithm that generated its training demonstrations, and the deterministic variant is fused into A* Local, which belongs to the same A* family as the A* Global expert. The closest prior-aware baseline, ACO-PAL [18], is not compared. These gaps are load-bearing for the generality claim.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.2.1, Tables 1–2 vs §3.5.2] The central claim of reusable priors for heterogeneous planners is not tested. STAPNet is trained on PFACO and A* Global demonstrations (§4.1); the stochastic evaluation fuses the prior only into PFACO (Tables 1–2), and the deterministic evaluation only into A* Local (Table 3), which is the same A* family as the A* Global expert. No stochastic planner not used in training (AS, EAS, MMAS, IHMACO) is tested as a fusion target, and the closest prior-aware local planner ACO-PAL [18] is absent. The observed gains could therefore be a same-algorithm correction rather than evidence of transfer. Please add cross-planner fusion experiments with at least one held-out stochastic planner and compare against ACO-PAL, or substantially narrow the claimed scope.
  2. [Table 3 and §4.2.1] Search efficiency is measured primarily by explored-node counts, but wall-clock time is substantially higher for ImiPath_A*_Local than for A* Local on every map scale (e.g., 7.30e-1 s vs 1.839e-2 s on Large). For the stochastic variants, no node-expansion counts are reported, and the time comparisons are mixed (e.g., FoV scale 3.344e-1 vs 3.132e-1; Small 8.160e-1 vs 6.407e-1; Medium-Large 1.426 vs 1.410). Since the title and abstract claim 'efficient path planning', the paper should either report node counts for stochastic planners and time for all variants, or explicitly state that node reduction does not imply wall-clock speedup. Without this, the efficiency claim is not fully supported.
  3. [§3.1.2 and §4.2.3] The load-bearing premise is that the 11×11 local observation (Eqs. 8–12) — obstacles, projected start/goal directions, and trajectory history — suffices to recover globally informed expert preferences. The ablations in §4.2.3 vary dataset size, network architecture, and fusion strategy, but never remove or replace an observation channel (e.g., M_T, M_S, or M_G). A channel-ablation study and a sensitivity analysis for the temporal decay γ (Eq. 11) and the fusion weights ρ, μ (Eq. 18) are needed to show that the prior exploits spatiotemporal structure rather than acting as a simple goal-direction bias.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and throughout] The word 'dicision' appears several times (e.g., abstract, §3, §3.5.2); it should be 'decision'.
  2. [§4.2.1] The sentence beginning 'On FoV scale, ImiPathA*Local achieves a 100% success rate...' is duplicated verbatim. Please remove the repetition.
  3. [Table 6 vs Table 1] STAPNet standalone runtime is inconsistent: Table 1 reports 3.361e-3 s while Table 6 reports 3.365e-1 s for essentially the same entry (APL and SR match). Please clarify which is correct and ensure consistent reporting.
  4. [§2.1] In the deterministic-planner review, 'Xu et al. [24]' and 'Huang et al. [24]' both cite the same reference [24], but the bibliography lists only Xu et al. (2024). The 'Huang et al.' citation appears to be a reference error.
  5. [§4.1] Training details are incomplete: learning rate, weight decay, batch size, epochs, gamma, alpha, beta, and the specific values of rho/mu for the main experiments are not collected in one place. The paper would benefit from a hyperparameter table. Additionally, no code or trained model is provided, which limits reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No derivation-level circularity; the deterministic A* transfer is independent, though the stochastic evaluation is self-referential (PFACO as both expert and host).

full rationale

The core derivation chain is an imitation-learning pipeline, not a first-principles reduction. STAPNet is trained by cross-entropy (Eq. 15) on expert demonstrations from A* Global and PFACO, then its output φ is used as a multiplicative bias in Eq. 18 (deterministic) or Eq. 19 (stochastic). The deterministic evaluation is not circular: the expert is A* Global, while the guided planner is A* Local on held-out maps, so the node-expansion gains are an empirical transfer result rather than a fitted parameter being re-evaluated on its own training target. The main concern is experimental scope: the stochastic variant is only tested as ImiPathPFACO, i.e., the same PFACO algorithm [14] that generated its training demonstrations, so the claimed 'heterogeneous planners' generality is not actually demonstrated. This weakens the external claim, but it is not an equation-level circularity because Eq. 19 does not reduce to Eq. 15 by construction; the learned policy could in principle fail to improve PFACO. Self-citations [13,14] are to the authors' prior ACO work but are not used as a load-bearing uniqueness/ansatz argument. Hence the derivation itself is self-contained; score 2 for the minor self-referential evaluation overlap.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on several hand-chosen hyperparameters (gamma, rho, mu, window size, ACO settings, and unreported network hyperparameters) and on domain assumptions about representational sufficiency and transfer. No new physical entity is postulated; STAPNet is a trained function, not an independently evidenced entity. The ledger shows the paper is an empirical method paper: most load-bearing choices are empirical or architectural rather than theoretical.

free parameters (5)
  • temporal decay factor gamma = not reported
    Eq. (11) weights recent trajectory history; no value or sensitivity analysis is given, and it directly shapes the temporal input to STAPNet.
  • prior weighting factors rho, mu = rho = mu = 0.5
    In Eq. (18), these balance heuristic and learned-prior terms; chosen via the FoV-scale ablation (§4.2.3) without further sensitivity analysis.
  • STAPNet training hyperparameters = not reported
    Algorithm 1 lists learning rate eta, weight decay lambda, batch size B, epochs T, but no numerical values or architecture sizes (layers, heads, embeddings) are provided; these determine the learned prior.
  • ACO parameters (alpha, beta, population, iterations) = light/full configurations
    Eq. (19) leaves alpha, beta unspecified; population 15/30 and iterations 10/20 are standardized settings, not tuned for ImiPath.
  • local observation window width W = 11
    FoV radius r_max=(W-1)/2 in Eq. (5) is a design choice; all observations and training data are tied to this scale.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Expert demonstrations from PFACO and A* Global are representative enough to learn transferable local direction priors.
    Section 4.1 uses these two planners as the sole training signal; no analysis checks how global-expert actions project into local windows.
  • domain assumption The 11x11 observation state (obstacles, projected start/goal, decayed history) is sufficient for predicting globally useful direction preferences.
    Eqs. (8)-(12) define the state; the entire policy learning rests on this sufficiency, which is only validated empirically.
  • domain assumption A policy trained on 11x11 windows generalizes to larger map scales and dynamic obstacle scenarios without retraining.
    Section 4.2 evaluates this empirically, but no invariance or transfer argument is provided.
  • domain assumption A* with an inadmissible local heuristic plus a learned prior term still returns feasible near-optimal paths.
    Eq. (18) uses h_local, which is not globally admissible; behavior is verified only by simulation.
  • domain assumption ACO transition probabilities with the prior multiplier preserve convergence and solution quality.
    Eq. (19) modifies the standard transition rule; no convergence analysis is given, only Tables 1-2.
  • standard math Softmax and cross-entropy define a well-behaved imitation objective.
    Eqs. (13) and (15) rely on standard properties of softmax and cross-entropy; no proof given, but these are standard.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Learning Spatiotemporal Decision Priors for Efficient Path Planning under Partial Observability." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/F2VNK65N

@misc{pith2026260722166,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Learning Spatiotemporal Decision Priors for Efficient Path Planning under Partial Observability},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/F2VNK65N}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.22166}
}
read the original abstract

Path planning under partial observability remains challenging because an agent must make long-horizon navigation decisions from only locally bounded observations. Nevertheless, historical trajectories contain reusable experience-guided directional preferences. Classical planners, however, typically solve each instance from scratch and lack an explicit mechanism to exploit such transferable decision knowledge, often leading to redundant node expansions and locally myopic search behaviors. Motivated by this limitation, this paper proposes ImiPath, a prior-guided learning framework that distills reusable spatiotemporal decision priors from demonstration trajectories and uses them as experience-informed directional guidance to bias planners toward reliable and promising search directions under partial observability. Specifically, ImiPath first constructs a local spatiotemporal observation representation, which encodes the spatial information of the local environment and the temporal information of historical trajectories. The SpatioTemporal-Attention Policy Network (STAPNet) then transforms this representation into dicision priors. These priors are further incorporated into heterogeneous planners as directional guidance, biasing the search toward locally promising regions. Extensive experiments demonstrate that ImiPath achieves competitive path quality and improves search efficiency by reducing redundant node expansions under local observability. Additional physical experiments on a magnetic microrobot platform further validate the adaptability and practical deployment potential of the proposed framework.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.22166 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The Framework of ImiPath. Top: The pipeline consists of end-to-end training (A) and inference (B). During training, expert demonstrations are encoded into spatiotemporal observations and used to learn decision priors via the STAPNet module. The STAPNet integrates a spatiotemporal cross-attention encoder and a policy head. At inference time, the learned policy operates under partial observability to guide planning. B… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Illustration of the proposed local spatiotemporal observation. The green box denotes the local FoV centered at the current agent position 𝐴. White and black cells represent free space and obstacles, respectively. The global start 𝑆 and goal 𝑇 are marked by orange and red circles. When they lie outside the current FoV, their relative directions are preserved by projecting them onto the FoV boundary as 𝑆 ′ and 𝑇 ′ . L… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Dynamic-environment results on fixed-size FoV maps. The blue dot and red star denote the start and goal, respectively, and the orange polyline denotes the robot trajectory. The dark-purple and light-purple squares indicate the obstacle positions at 𝑡0 and 𝑡𝑁 , respectively, while the green polyline shows the obstacle trajectory. Yellow circles mark key events. (a) and (b) show the same task under different congestio… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Effects of dataset scale and network architecture on decision-making performance. (a) Training performance of STAPNet under different dataset sizes. (b) Performance comparison of different network architectures and the complete ImiPath framework. Shaded areas indicate …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Experimental setup of the vision-based magnetic microrobot navigation system. The platform integrates an industrial camera for real-time visual tracking, an area light source for uniform illumination, and a magnetic field generator for precise actuation. The inset illu…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Experimental results of ImiPath on the magnetic mi￾crorobot platform. (a) Composite visualization reconstructed from sequential local FoV observations collected at different intermediate positions along the navigation path; colored boxes denote the corresponding local …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

32 extracted references

  1. [18]

    Aco–pal: A prior-aware learning framework for local path planning in complex environments

    Ren, J., Chen, S., Yu, Z., Chen, Y., Sun, Y., 2026. Aco–pal: A prior-aware learning framework for local path planning in complex environments. Knowledge-Based Systems , 115675

    2026

  2. [1]

    Enhancing the safety and smoothness of path planning through an integration of dijkstra’s algorithm and piecewise cubic bezier optimization

    Ahmad, J., Ab Wahab, M.N., 2025. Enhancing the safety and smoothness of path planning through an integration of dijkstra’s algorithm and piecewise cubic bezier optimization. Expert Systems with Applications 289, 128315

    2025

  3. [2]

    Learning heuristic searchviaimitation,in:Proc.Conf.RobotLearn.(CoRL),PMLR.pp

    Bhardwaj, M., Choudhury, S., Scherer, S., 2017. Learning heuristic searchviaimitation,in:Proc.Conf.RobotLearn.(CoRL),PMLR.pp. 271–280

    2017

  4. [3]

    Ant colony optimization: Introduction and recent trends

    Blum, C., 2005. Ant colony optimization: Introduction and recent trends. Phys. Life Rev. 2, 353–373

    2005

  5. [4]

    Integrated task assign- ment and path planning for collision-minimizing multiple automated guided vehicles scheduling

    Chen, C., Wang, Y., Chang, X., Shi, J., 2026. Integrated task assign- ment and path planning for collision-minimizing multiple automated guided vehicles scheduling. Expert Systems with Applications 302, 130615

    2026

  6. [5]

    Multi- strategy adaptable ant colony optimization algorithm and its applica- tioninrobotpathplanning

    Cui, J., Wu, L., Huang, X., Xu, D., Liu, C., Xiao, W., 2024. Multi- strategy adaptable ant colony optimization algorithm and its applica- tioninrobotpathplanning. Knowledge-BasedSystems288,111459

    2024

  7. [6]

    Rrt*-enhanced long- horizon path planning for auv adaptive sampling using a cost valley

    Ge, Y., Eidsvik, J., Olaisen, A.J.H., 2025. Rrt*-enhanced long- horizon path planning for auv adaptive sampling using a cost valley. Knowl.-Based Syst. 315, 113261

    2025

  8. [7]

    Regarding jumppointsearchandsubgoalgraphs,in:Proc.Int.JointConf.Artif

    Harabor, D.D., Uras, T., Stuckey, P.J., Koenig, S., 2019. Regarding jumppointsearchandsubgoalgraphs,in:Proc.Int.JointConf.Artif. Intell. (IJCAI), pp. 1241–1248

    2019

Show all 32 references
  1. [8]

    Poster: Adaptive astar algorithm for calculation time reduction of autonomous vehicle’s pathfinding, in: 2024IEEEVehicularNetworkingConference(VNC),IEEE.pp.253– 254

    Jeon, Y., Park, D., 2024. Poster: Adaptive astar algorithm for calculation time reduction of autonomous vehicle’s pathfinding, in: 2024IEEEVehicularNetworkingConference(VNC),IEEE.pp.253– 254

    2024

  2. [9]

    Transpath: Learning heuristics for grid-based pathfinding via trans- formers, in: Proc

    Kirilenko, D., Andreychuk, A., Panov, A., Yakovlev, K., 2023. Transpath: Learning heuristics for grid-based pathfinding via trans- formers, in: Proc. AAAI Conf. Artif. Intell., pp. 12436–12443

    2023

  3. [10]

    Research on collaborative path planning of uav swarms for urban logisticsdistributionindensebuildingenvironments

    Lai, Y., Wu, H., Xia, Y., Fu, X., Duan, D., Wang, A., Shi, M., 2026. Research on collaborative path planning of uav swarms for urban logisticsdistributionindensebuildingenvironments. ExpertSystems with Applications 305, 130816

    2026

  4. [11]

    An efficient and accuratea-staralgorithmforautonomousvehiclepathplanning.IEEE Trans

    Lin, Z., Wu, K., Shen, R., Yu, X., Huang, S., 2023. An efficient and accuratea-staralgorithmforautonomousvehiclepathplanning.IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 73, 9003–9008

    2023

  5. [12]

    Path planning techniques for mobile robots: Review and prospect

    Liu, L., Wang, X., Yang, X., Liu, H., Li, J., Wang, P., 2023a. Path planning techniques for mobile robots: Review and prospect. Expert Syst. Appl. 227, 120254

  6. [13]

    Learning- based neural ant colony optimization, in: Proc

    Liu, Y., Qiu, J., Hart, E., Yu, Y., Gan, Z., Li, W., 2023b. Learning- based neural ant colony optimization, in: Proc. Genet. Evol. Comput. Conf. (GECCO), pp. 47–55

  7. [14]

    Pheromone-focused ant colony optimization algorithm for path planning, in: 2025 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), IEEE

    Liu, Y., Zhang, H., Gan, Z., Chen, Y., Zhou, Z., Meng, C., Ouyang, C., 2025. Pheromone-focused ant colony optimization algorithm for path planning, in: 2025 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), IEEE. pp. 1420–1427

    2025

  8. [15]

    Gpu-enabled decentralized,multi-robotpathplanningbasedonglobalevolutionary dynamicprogrammingandlocalparticleswarmoptimization

    Ou, J., Song, G., Guo, J., Cao, Y., Wang, Y., 2026. Gpu-enabled decentralized,multi-robotpathplanningbasedonglobalevolutionary dynamicprogrammingandlocalparticleswarmoptimization. Expert Systems with Applications 321, 132321

    2026

  9. [16]

    Rao, J., Xiang, C., Xi, J., Chen, J., Lei, J., Giernacki, W., Liu, M.,

  10. [17]

    Path planning algorithms in the autonomous driving system: A comprehensive review

    Reda, M., Onsy, A., Haikal, A.Y., Ghanbari, A., 2024. Path planning algorithms in the autonomous driving system: A comprehensive review. Robot. Auton. Syst. 174, 104630

    2024

  11. [19]

    Realistic scenario-based trajectory control, path planning, and collision avoidance for autonomous vehi- cles

    Sathya, K.S., Kumar, S.M., 2026. Realistic scenario-based trajectory control, path planning, and collision avoidance for autonomous vehi- cles. Expert Systems with Applications , 132078

    2026

  12. [20]

    Implementingagpu-basedparallelmax–min ant system

    Skinderowicz,R.,2020. Implementingagpu-basedparallelmax–min ant system. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 106, 277–295

    2020

  13. [21]

    Simulation- based review of classical, heuristic, and metaheuristic path planning algorithms

    Ugwoke, K.C., Nnanna, N.A., Abdullahi, S.E.Y., 2025. Simulation- based review of classical, heuristic, and metaheuristic path planning algorithms. Sci. Rep. 15, 12643

    2025

  14. [22]

    Adaptedantcolonyoptimizationforlarge-scaleorienteeringproblem, in: Proc

    Wu, D.M., Yang, Q., Zhou, C.J., Zheng, Z.L., Zhang, J., 2024. Adaptedantcolonyoptimizationforlarge-scaleorienteeringproblem, in: Proc. Genet. Evol. Comput. Conf. (GECCO), pp. 223–226

    2024

  15. [23]

    Modifiedadaptive antcolonyoptimizationalgorithmanditsapplicationforsolvingpath planning of mobile robot

    Wu,L.,Huang,X.,Cui,J.,Liu,C.,Xiao,W.,2023. Modifiedadaptive antcolonyoptimizationalgorithmanditsapplicationforsolvingpath planning of mobile robot. Expert Syst. Appl. 215, 119410

    2023

  16. [24]

    Research on global path planning algorithm for mobile robots based on improved a*

    Xu, X., Zeng, J., Zhao, Y., Lü, X., 2024. Research on global path planning algorithm for mobile robots based on improved a*. Expert Syst. Appl. 243, 122922

    2024

  17. [25]

    Deepaco: Neural- enhanced ant systems for combinatorial optimization

    Ye, H., Wang, J., Cao, Z., Liang, H., Li, Y., 2023. Deepaco: Neural- enhanced ant systems for combinatorial optimization. Proc. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. (NeurIPS) 36, 43706–43728

    2023

  18. [26]

    Path planning using neural a* search, in: Proc

    Yonetani, R., Taniai, T., Barekatain, M., Nishimura, M., Kanezaki, A., 2021. Path planning using neural a* search, in: Proc. Int. Conf. Mach. Learn. (ICML), PMLR. PMLR. pp. 12029–12039

    2021

  19. [27]

    An ant colony optimization algorithm with evolutionary experience-guided pheromone updating strategies for multi-objective optimization

    Zhao, H., Zhang, C., 2022. An ant colony optimization algorithm with evolutionary experience-guided pheromone updating strategies for multi-objective optimization. Expert Systems with Applications 201, 117151

    2022

  20. [28]

    An optimized q-learning algorithm for mobile robot local path planning

    Zhou, Q., Lian, Y., Wu, J., Zhu, M., Wang, H., Cao, J., 2024. An optimized q-learning algorithm for mobile robot local path planning. Knowl.-Based Syst. 286, 111400

    2024

  21. [29]

    Enhancing unmanned marine vehicle path plan- ning: A fractal-enhanced chaotic grey wolf and differential evolution approach

    Zhu,C.,Bouteraa,Y.,Khishe,M.,Martín,D.,Hernando-Gallego,F., Vaiyapuri, T., 2025. Enhancing unmanned marine vehicle path plan- ning: A fractal-enhanced chaotic grey wolf and differential evolution approach. Knowledge-Based Systems 317, 113481

    2025

  22. [30]

    Zou, L., Ma, S., Liu, Y., Dong, X., Zhou, Z., Ouyang, C., Gan, Z.,

  23. [2023]

    Knowledge-Based Systems 277, 110797

    Path planning for dual uavs cooperative suspension transport based on artificial potential field-a* algorithm. Knowledge-Based Systems 277, 110797

  24. [2025]

    IEEE Int

    A modified resistance model for magnetic honeycomb robots to navigate in low reynolds number fluids, in: Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robot. Autom. (ICRA), IEEE. pp. 1–7. First Author et al.:Preprint submitted to ElsevierPage 11 of 11

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.