PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
August 25, 2025Sensors1 citationsOpen Access

Comparative Benchmark of Sampling-Based and DRL Motion Planning Methods for Industrial Robotic Arms

View Full Paper
IAIgnacio Fidalgo AstorquiaUniversidad de DeustoGVGuillermo Villate-CastilloAssociation of Electronic and Information TechnologiesATAlberto TellaecheUniversidad de Deusto

Key Points

  • The DRL planner demonstrated significantly lower planning times compared to classical methods, achieving a marked performance upgrade.
  • Key metrics measured include planning time, success rate, and trajectory smoothness, revealing strengths of both approaches.
  • This work evaluated traditional sampling-based and DRL planning methods on a UR3e robot, integrating a dataset with over 100,000 trajectories.
  • Findings suggest DRL's potential for real-time planning, while classical planners excel in zero-shot adaptability to new environments.

Abstract

This study presents a comprehensive comparison between classical sampling-based motion planners from the Open Motion Planning Library (OMPL) and a learning-based planner based on Soft Actor–Critic (SAC) for motion planning in industrial robotic arms. Using a UR3e robot equipped with an RG2 gripper, we constructed a large-scale dataset of over 100,000 collision-free trajectories generated with MoveIt-integrated OMPL planners. These trajectories were used to train a DRL agent via curriculum learning and expert demonstrations. Both approaches were evaluated on key metrics such as planning time, success rate, and trajectory smoothness. Results show that the DRL-based planner achieves higher success rates and significantly lower planning times, producing more compact and deterministic trajectories. Time-optimal parameterization using TOPPRA ensured the dynamic feasibility of all trajectories. While classical planners retain advantages in zero-shot adaptability and environmental generality, our findings highlight the potential of DRL for real-time and high-throughput motion planning in industrial contexts. This work provides practical insights into the trade-offs between traditional and learning-based planning paradigms, paving the way for hybrid architectures that combine their strengths.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Astorquia et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68af61fdad7bf08b1eae29d0https://doi.org/10.3390/s25175282
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Search-based versus Sampling-based Robot Motion Planning: A Comparative Study2024
  2. 2URPlanner: A Universal Paradigm For Collision-Free Robotic Motion Planning Based on Deep Reinforcement Learning2025
  3. 3Trajectory Planning of Robotic Manipulator in Dynamic Environment Exploiting DRL2024 · 2 citations
  4. 4Deep-Reinforcement-Learning-Based Motion Planning for a Wide Range of Robotic Structures2024 · 9 citations
  5. 5Bridging the gap between Learning-to-plan, Motion Primitives and Safe Reinforcement Learning2024