Comparison of Eulerian and Hamiltonian circuits for evolutionary-based path planning of an autonomous surface vehicle for monitoring Ypacarai Lake

  • M. Arzamendia
  • I. Espartza
  • D. G. ReinaEmail author
  • S. L. Toral
  • D. Gregor
Original Research


An evolutionary-based path planning is designed for an autonomous surface vehicle (ASV) used in environmental monitoring tasks. The main objective is that the ASV covers the maximum area of a large mass of water such as the Ypacarai Lake while taking water samples for sensing pollution conditions. Such coverage problem is transformed into a path planning optimization problem through the placement of a set of data beacons located at the shore of the lake and considering the relationship between the distance traveled by the ASV and the area of the lake covered. The optimal set of beacons to be visited by the ASV has been modeled through two different approaches such as Hamiltonian and Eulerian circuits. When Hamiltonian circuits are used, all the beacons should be visited only once. In the case of Eulerian circuits, the only limitation is that repeated routes cannot exist between two beacons. Both models have important implications on the possible trajectories of ASV throughout the lake. In this paper, we compare the application of both models for the optimization of the proposed evolutionary-based path planning. Due to the complexity of the optimization problem, a metaheuristic technique like a Genetic Algorithm (GA) is used to obtain quasi-optimal solutions in both models. The models have been compared by simulation and the results reveal that the Eulerian circuit approach can achieve an improvement of 2% when comparing to the Hamiltonian circuit approach.


Autonomous surface vehicle Coverage path planning Eulerian circuits Hamiltonian circuits Genetic algorithm 



The authors would like to thank Fundación Carolina and its PhD scholarships program. The authors would like to thank Mónica Díaz López for her help in proofreading the manuscript.


  1. Arzamendia M. (2017) Accesed 5 June 2018.Google Scholar
  2. Arzamendia M, Gregor D, Reina DG, Toral SL, Gregor R (2016) Evolutionary path planning of an autonomous surface vehicle for water quality monitoring. In: IEEE 9th International Conference on Developments in eSystems Engineering (DeSE), 2016, pp 245–250.Google Scholar
  3. Arzamendia M, Gregor D, Reina DG, Toral SL (2017) An evolutionary approach to constrained path planning of an autonomous surface vehicle for maximizing the covered area of Ypacarai Lake. Soft Comput. Google Scholar
  4. Brownlee J (2011) Clever algorithms: nature-inspired programming recipes. Jason BrownleeGoogle Scholar
  5. Dréo J, Pétrowski A, Siarry P, Taillard E (2006) Metaheuristics for hard optimization: methods and case studies. Springer, BerlinzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Eiselt HA, Gendreau M, Laporte G (1995a) Arc routing problems, part I: the Chinese postman problem. Oper Res 43(2):231–242MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Eiselt HA, Gendreau M, Laporte G (1995b) Arc routing problems, part II: the rural postman problem. Operat Res 43(3):399–414CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Fleischner H (2001) (Some of) the many uses of Eulerian graphs in graph theory (plus some applications). Discret Math 230(1–3):23–43MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Fortin FA, Rainville FMD, Gardner MA, Parizeau M, Gagné C (2012) DEAP: Evolutionary algorithms made easy. J Mach Learn Res 13:2171–2175MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Galceran E, Carreras M (2013) A survey on coverage path planning for robotics. Robot Auton syst 61(12):1258–1276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gendreau M, Potvin JY (2010) Handbook of metaheuristics, vol 2. Springer, New YorkCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Hoffman KL, Padberg M, Rinaldi G (2013) Traveling salesman problem. Encyclopedia of operations research and management science. Springer, Berlin, pp 1573–1578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Liu Z, Zhang Y, Yu X, Yuan C (2016) Unmanned surface vehicles: an overview of developments and challenges. Ann Rev Control 41:71–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Miller BN, Ranum DL (2011) Problem solving with algorithms and data structures using python Second Edition. Franklin, Beedle & Associates Inc, PortlandGoogle Scholar
  15. Mukherjee A, Panigrahi G, Kar S, Maiti M (2017) Constrained covering solid travelling salesman problems in uncertain environment. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput. Google Scholar
  16. Pascarella D, Venticinque S, Aversa R, Mattei M, Blasi L (2015) Parallel and distributed computing for UAVs trajectory planning. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput 6(6):773–782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Pham TH, Bestaoui Y, Mammar S (2017) Aerial robot coverage path planning approach with concave obstacles in precision agriculture. In: IEEE workshop on research, education and development of unmanned aerial systems (RED-UAS), 2017, pp 43–48Google Scholar
  18. Ryerson AF, Zhang Q (2007) Vehicle path planning for complete field coverage using genetic algorithms. CIGR J, Agric Eng Int 9:1–11Google Scholar
  19. Sastry K, Goldberg DE, Kendall G (2014) Genetic algorithms. In: Burke EK, Kendall G (eds) Search methodologies. Springer, Boston, MAGoogle Scholar
  20. Schäfle TR, Mohamed S, Uchiyama N, Sawodny O (2016) Coverage path planning for mobile robots using genetic algorithm with energy optimization. In: Electronics Symposium (IES), 2016 International, IEEE, pp 99–104Google Scholar
  21. Sivanandam SN, Deepa SN (2007) Introduction to genetic algorithms. Springer, BerlinzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. Su S, Zhao S (2017) A hierarchical hybrid of genetic algorithm and particle swarm optimization for distributed clustering in large-scale wireless sensor networks. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput:1–11Google Scholar
  23. Tokekar P, Branson E, Vander Hook J, Isler V (2013) Tracking aquatic invaders: Autonomous robots for monitoring invasive fish. IEEE Robot Autom Mag 20(3):33–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wallis WD (2013) Mathematics in the real world. Birkhauser, BostonCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. Wang Y (2014) The hybrid genetic algorithm with two local optimization strategies for traveling salesman problem. Comput Ind Eng 70:124–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Yang XS (2014) Nature-inspired optimization algorithms. Elsevier, AmsterdamzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. Zhou K, Jensen AL, Sørensen CG, Busato P, Bothtis DD (2014) Agricultural operations planning in fields with multiple obstacle areas. Comput Electron Agric 109:12–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Arzamendia
    • 1
  • I. Espartza
    • 2
  • D. G. Reina
    • 3
    Email author
  • S. L. Toral
    • 2
  • D. Gregor
    • 1
  1. 1.Research Department, Faculty of EngineeringNational University of AsuncionSan LorenzoParaguay
  2. 2.Electronic Engineering DepartmentUniversity of SevilleSevilleSpain
  3. 3.Engineering DepartmentLoyola University AndalusiaSevilleSpain

Personalised recommendations