Randomized trial evaluates energy usage and task efficiency in robotic swarms, suggesting improved coordination methods.
Energy-efficient coordination of robotic swarms requires effective integration of task scheduling, motion planning, and communication management, particularly in resource-constrained environments where computation and wireless communication compete for limited energy resources. Existing multi-robot approaches typically address these concerns in separate stages: task-allocation methods (e.g., market- and auction-based schemes) price assignments by distance, and computation-offloading methods decide execution placement after a route has been fixed. This paper’s specific contribution is to fold the execution-placement decision (local computation versus offloading to a peer) into the edge-relaxation step of an A* path search, using a composite cost whose communication term is derived from the instantaneous neighborhood of each node; routing and compute placement are therefore co-optimized within a single search rather than in decoupled stages. The framework is evaluated in simulation with a swarm of 25 robots against two decoupled baselines: a path-only planner that ignores workload and communication costs, and a workload-only scheduler that ignores travel and communication costs. Across 20 randomized trials, the proposed heuristic reduces total swarm energy consumption by approximately 22% relative to the path-only baseline and 9% relative to the workload-only baseline, shortens average task completion time by roughly 20%, and lowers the load imbalance factor from 6.7 (path-only) and 3.2 (workload-only) to 1.9. We report these gains for the tested configurations and delimit their scope: the search retains the asymptotic complexity of standard A*, but path optimality does not extend to the compute-placement decisions, which are locally greedy, and all results are obtained in simulation rather than on hardware.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ijaz et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: