Mobile Networks and Applications

, Volume 14, Issue 3, pp 292–308 | Cite as

Safe and Distributed Kinodynamic Replanning for Vehicular Networks

  • Kostas E. Bekris
  • Konstantinos I. Tsianos
  • Lydia E. Kavraki


This work deals with the problem of planning collision-free motions for multiple communicating vehicles that operate in the same, partially-observable environment in real-time. A challenging aspect of this problem is how to utilize communication so that vehicles do not reach states from which collisions cannot be avoided due to second-order motion constraints. This paper initially shows how it is possible to provide theoretical safety guarantees with a priority-based coordination scheme. Safety means avoiding collisions with obstacles and between vehicles. This notion is also extended to include the retainment of a communication network when the vehicles operate as a networked team. The paper then progresses to extend this safety framework into a fully distributed communication protocol for real-time planning. The proposed algorithm integrates sampling-based motion planners with message-passing protocols for distributed constraint optimization. Each vehicle uses the motion planner to generate candidate feasible trajectories and the message-passing protocol for selecting a safe and compatible trajectory. The existence of such trajectories is guaranteed by the overall approach. The theoretical results have also been experimentally confirmed with a distributed simulator built on a cluster of processors and using applications such as coordinated exploration. Furthermore, experiments show that the distributed protocol has better scalability properties when compared against the priority-based scheme.


motion coordination  message-passing protocol motion planning  vehicular networks real-time control safety 



Work on this paper has been supported in part by NSF 0308237, 0615328 and 0713623. The computational experiments were run on equipment obtained by CNS 0454333, and CNS 0421109 in partnership with Rice University, AMD and Cray. The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers and the organizing committee of ROBOCOMM 2007 for their comments and their invitation to MONE. Furthermore, the comments by the MONE reviewing and editorial team were helpful in further improving the quality of the final manuscript.


  1. 1.
    Yang X, Liu L, Vaidya NH, Zhao F (2004) A vehicle-to-vehicle communication protocol for cooperative collision warning. In: MOBIQUITOUS-04, Boston, 22–26 August 2004Google Scholar
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
    Clarc C, Rock S, Latombe J-C (2003) Dynamic networks for motion planning in multi-robot space systems. In: Intl. symp. of artificial intelligence, robotics and automation in space, Kobe, 20–24 July 2003Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Clark MC, Bretl T, Rock S (2002) Applying kinodynamic randomized motion planning with a dynamic priority system to multi-robot space systems. In: Aerospace conference, Toulouse, 16–19 June 2002Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Murray RM (2007) Recent research in cooperative control of multi-vehicle systems. ASME J Dyn Syst Meas Control 129(5):571–583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ogren P, Fiorelli E, Leonard NE (2004) Cooperative control of mobile sensor networks: adaptive gradient climbing in distributed environments. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 49(8):1292–1302CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Olfati-Saber R (2006) Flocking for multi-agent dynamic systems: algorithms and theory. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 51(3):401–420CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pereira GAS, Das AK, Kumar V, Campos MFM (2003) Decentralized motion planning for multiple robots subject to sesnsing and communication constraints. In: Work. on multi-robot systemsGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tanner HG, Pappas GJ, Kumar V (2004) Leader-to-formation stability. IEEE TRA 20(3):443–455Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Egerstedt M, Hu X, Stotsky A (2001) Control of mobile platforms using a virtual vehicle approach. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 46(4):1777–1782, NovemberzbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pallotino L, Scordio VG, Frazzoli E, Bicchi A (2006) Decentralized and scalable conflict resolution strategy for multi-agent systems. In: Int. symp. on mathematical theory of networks and systems, Kyoto, 24–28 July 2006Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dimarogonas DV, Kyriakopoulos KJ, Theodorakatos D (2006) Totally distributed motion control of sphere world multi-agent systems using decentralized navigation functions. In: IEEE Int Conf Robot AutomGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Loizou S, Dimarogonas D, Kyriakopoulos K (2004) Decentralized feedback stabilization of multiple nonholonomic agents. In: IEEE Int Conf Robot Autom, vol 3, pp 3012–3017Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    LaValle S (2006) Planning algorithms. Cambridge University Press, CambridgezbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kavraki LE, Svestka P, Latombe J-C, Overmars M (1996) Probabilistic roadmaps for path planning in high-dimensional configuration spaces. IEEE TRA 12(4):566–580Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Choset H, Lynch KM, Hutchinson S, Kantor G, Burgard W, Kavraki LE, Thrun S (2005) Principles of robot motion: theory, algorithms, and implementations. MIT, BostonzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Donald BR, Xavier PG, Canny JF, Reif JH (1993) Kinodynamic motion planning. J ACM 40(5):1048–1066zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    LaValle SM, Kuffner JJ (2001) Randomized kinodynamic planning. IJRR 20(5):378–400Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ladd AM, Kavraki LE (2005) Motion planning in the presence of drift, underactuation and discrete system changes. In: Robot Sci Syst I, Cambridge, June 2005Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bekris KE, Kavraki LE (2007) Greedy but safe replanning under kinodynamic constraints. In: IEEE Int Conf Robot Autom, Rome, April 2007Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hsu D, Kindel R, Latombe J-C, Rock S (2002) Randomized kinodynamic motion planning with moving obstacles. IJRR 21(3):233–255Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bruce J, Veloso M (2006) Safe multi-robot navigation within dynamic constraints. Proc IEEE 94:1398–1411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ferguson D, Kalra N, Stentz A (2006) Replanning with RRTs. In: IEEE Int Conf Robot AutomGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zucker M, Kuffner J, Branicky M (2007) Multipartite RRTs for rapid replanning in dynamic environments. In: IEEE int. conf. on robotics and automation, ICRA-07Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gayle R, Klinger KR, Xavier PG (2007) Lazy reconfiguration forest: an approach for planning with multiple tasks in dynamic environments. In: IEEE Int Conf Robot Autom, Rome, 10–14 April 2007, pp 1316–1323Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Berg Jvd, Ferguson D, Kuffner J (2006) Anytime path planning and replanning in dynamic environments. In: IEEE Int Conf Robot Autom, MayGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kallman M, Mataric M (2004) Motion planning using dynamic roadmaps. In: IEEE Int Conf Robot Autom-04, vol 5Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Fraichard T, Asama H (2004) Inevitable collision states—a step towards safer robots? Adv Robot 18(10):1001–1024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Petti S, Fraichard T (2005) Partial motion planning framework for reactive planning within dynamic environments. In: IEEE Int Conf Robot Autom, Barcelona, September 2005Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Frazzoli E, Dahleh MA, Feron E (2002) Real-time motion planning for agile autonomous vehicles. AIAA J Guid Control 25(1):116–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sanchez G, Latombe J-C (2003) A single-query bi-directional probabilistic roadmap planner with lazy collision checking. In: Int Symp Rob Res, pp 404–417Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bennewitz M, Burgard W, Thrun S (2002) Finding and optimizing solvable priority schemes for decoupled path planning for teams of mobile robots. Robot Auton Syst 41(2):89–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Saha M, Isto P (2006) Multi-robot motion planning by incremental coordination. In: Int Conf Intell Robot SystGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bekris KE, Tsianos KI, Kavraki LE (2007) A decentralized planner that guarantees the safety of communicating vehicles with complex dynamics that replan online. In: IEEE/RSJ Int Conf Intell Robot Syst (IROS 2007), 29 Oct 2007–2 Nov 2007, pp 3784–3790Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yokoo M, Hirayama K (2000) Algorithms for distributed constraint satisfaction: a review. Auton Agents Multi-Agent Syst 3(2):189–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Modi PJ, Shen W-M, Tambe M, Yokoo M (2005) An asynchronous complete method for distributed constraint optimization. Artif Intell J 161(1–2):149–180zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Guestrin C, Koller D, Parr R (2002) Multiagent planning with factored MDPs. In: NIPS-14. MIT, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Gerkey BP, Mataric MJ (2002) Sold!: auction methods for multi-robot coordination. IEEE TRA 18(5):758–786Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Diass MB, Zlot R, Kalra N, Stentz A (2006) Market-based multirobot coordination: a survey and analysis. Proc IEEE 94(7):1257–1270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Pearl J (1988) Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems. Morgan Kaufmann, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kok JR, Vlassis N (2006) Collaborative multiagent reinforcement learning by payoff propagation. J Mach Learn Res 7:1789–1828MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Plarre K, Kumar PR (2004) Extended message passing algorithm for inference in loopy Gaussian graphical models. Ad Hoc Netw 2:153–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Bekris KE, Tsianos KI, Kavraki LE (2007) A distributed protocol for safe real-time planning of communicating vehicles with second-order dynamics. In: First Int Conf Robot Commun CoordGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ladd AM, Kavraki LE (2005) Fast tree-based exploration of state space for robots with dynamics. In: Workshop Algorithmic Found Robot, pp 297–312Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Hsieh MA, Kumar V, Taylor CJ (2004) Constructing radio signal strength maps with multiple robots. In: IEEE inter. conference on robotics and automation, vol 4, New Orleans, April 2004, pp 4184–4189Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Singh G, Bernstein AJ (1995) A highly asynchronous minimum spanning tree protocol. Distrib Comput 8(3):151–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Radia P (1985) An algorithm for distributed computation of a spanning tree in an extended LAN. ACM SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev 15(4):44–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kostas E. Bekris
    • 1
  • Konstantinos I. Tsianos
    • 1
  • Lydia E. Kavraki
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentRice UniversityHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations