1 / 40

Finding Optimal Solutions to Cooperative Pathfinding Problems

Finding Optimal Solutions to Cooperative Pathfinding Problems. Trevor Standley Computer Science Department University of California, Los Angeles http://cs.ucla.edu/~tstand/. Introduction. Pathfinding Problems A single agent must find a path from a start state to a goal state

evania
Télécharger la présentation

Finding Optimal Solutions to Cooperative Pathfinding Problems

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Finding Optimal Solutions to Cooperative Pathfinding Problems Trevor Standley Computer Science Department University of California, Los Angeles http://cs.ucla.edu/~tstand/

  2. Introduction • Pathfinding Problems • A single agent must find a path from a start state to a goal state • Cooperative Pathfinding Problems • Multiple agents interact • Want to minimize the total cost

  3. Motivation

  4. Motivation

  5. Motivation

  6. My Formulation • Gridworld pathfinding

  7. Related Work • Centralized Approaches • Strengths: Typically complete, can be optimal • Weaknesses: Takes forever! • Decoupled Approaches • Strengths: Fast • Weaknesses: Incomplete and suboptimal

  8. Related Work • Centralized Approaches • Strengths: Typically complete, can be optimal • Weaknesses: Takes forever! • Decoupled Approaches • Strengths: Fast • Weaknesses: Incomplete and suboptimal

  9. Related Work • Centralized Approaches • Strengths: Typically complete, can be optimal • Weaknesses: Takes forever! • Decoupled Approaches • Strengths: Fast • Weaknesses: Incomplete and suboptimal

  10. Related Work • Centralized Approaches • Strengths: Typically complete, can be optimal • Weaknesses: Takes forever! • Decoupled Approaches • Strengths: Fast • Weaknesses: Incomplete and suboptimal

  11. Related Work • Centralized Approaches • Strengths: Typically complete, can be optimal • Weaknesses: Takes forever! • Decoupled Approaches • Strengths: Fast • Weaknesses: Incomplete and suboptimal

  12. Related Work • Centralized Approaches • Strengths: Typically complete, can be optimal • Weaknesses: Takes forever! • Decoupled Approaches • Strengths: Fast • Weaknesses: Incomplete and suboptimal

  13. Related Work • Centralized Approaches • Strengths: Typically complete, can be optimal • Weaknesses: Takes forever! • Decoupled Approaches • Strengths: Fast • Weaknesses: Incomplete and suboptimal

  14. Related Work • Centralized Approaches • Strengths: Typically complete, can be optimal • Weaknesses: Takes forever! • Decoupled Approaches • Strengths: Fast • Weaknesses: Incomplete and suboptimal

  15. Related Work • Centralized Approaches • Strengths: Typically complete, can be optimal • Weaknesses: Takes forever! • Decoupled Approaches • Strengths: Fast • Weaknesses: Incomplete and suboptimal

  16. Related Work • Centralized Approaches • Strengths: Typically complete, can be optimal • Weaknesses: Takes forever! • Decoupled Approaches • Strengths: Fast • Weaknesses: Incomplete and suboptimal

  17. Related Work • Centralized Approaches • Strengths: Typically complete, can be optimal • Weaknesses: Takes forever! • Decoupled Approaches • Strengths: Fast • Weaknesses: Incomplete and suboptimal

  18. Related Work • Centralized Approaches • Strengths: Typically complete, can be optimal • Weaknesses: Takes forever! • Decoupled Approaches • Strengths: Fast • Weaknesses: Incomplete and suboptimal

  19. Related Work • Centralized Approaches • Strengths: Typically complete, can be optimal • Weaknesses: Takes forever! • Decoupled Approaches • Strengths: Fast • Weaknesses: Incomplete and suboptimal

  20. Related Work • Centralized Approaches • Strengths: Typically complete, can be optimal • Weaknesses: Takes forever! • Decoupled Approaches • Strengths: Fast • Weaknesses: Incomplete and suboptimal

  21. Related Work • Centralized Approaches • Strengths: Typically complete, can be optimal • Weaknesses: Takes forever! • Decoupled Approaches • Strengths: Fast • Weaknesses: Incomplete and suboptimal

  22. The Standard Algorithm • The standard algorithm is A* • Centralized algorithm • There is a standard heuristic • State representation – A position for each agent • State space – Exponential in the number of agents • An operator – Complete assignment of moves to agents • One of {N; NE; E; SE; S; SW; W; NW; and wait} for each agent • Exponential in the number of agents • Obviously this algorithm is not taken seriously

  23. My algorithm • Optimal • Complete • Two main contributions • Operator decomposition • Independence detection

  24. Operator Decomposition • Intuition • Also a centralized algorithm • Still use A* • Change how operators are defined: only one agent moves at a time • Simple idea, tricky to get details right

  25. Operator Decomposition • Each operator assigns a move to a single agent • Assignments are made in a fixed order • Move assignments stored as part of the state representation

  26. Operator Decomposition • Example

  27. Operator Decomposition

  28. The Savings of Operator Decomposition

  29. Consequences of Operator Decomposition • Branching factor becomes polynomial • However, state space still exponential

  30. Simple Independence Detection

  31. Simple Independence Detection • Create a group for each agent • Plan paths for each group independently • Check for conflicts in new paths • Combine groups with conflicting paths • Repeat 2-4 until no conflicts

  32. Simple Independence Detection

  33. Simple Independence Detection Problem • Are these agents independent?

  34. Simple Independence Detection Problem • Are these agents independent?

  35. Better Independence Detection • When a conflict is detected between two groups, try to find an alternate path for one of the groups • If that fails try to find an alternate path for the other group • Only combine groups if no alternate path could be found

  36. Independence Detection • Which alternate paths are the best? • Only search for optimal paths • Paths can be found using operator decomposition • Find paths that will lead to fewest number of future conflicts • Operator decomposition can be modified to find optimal paths with few future conflicts

  37. My Algorithm • Uses decoupled planning where possible • Only uses centralized planning for non-independent subproblems • Calls operator decomposition as a subroutine to do the centralized planning

  38. Results • 10000 randomly generated problems with 2-60 agents

  39. Conclusions • Researchers have developed centralized and decoupled approaches for solving cooperative pathfinding problems • Operator decomposition is an improved centralized approach • Independence detection is a hybrid approach • Only uses centralized planning when necessary

  40. Acknowledgments • My advisor, Rich Korf. • Dawn Chen for editing, advice, and artwork

More Related