CADENCE: Predicting Realized MAPF Execution Time Beyond Sum of Costs

arXiv:2606.04746v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multi-Agent Path Finding (MAPF) algorithms are increasingly used to plan motion for robot teams in industrial warehouses and robotic shared workspaces, but standard MAPF algorithm evaluation metrics, such as Sum of Costs (SoC), makespan, and planner runtime, can obscure how planner choices translate into realistic execution performance. We present CADENCE (Coordination and Action-Driven Estimation for Networked Continuous Execution), a hardware study of this evaluation gap on a fixed 7 by 7 workcell with seven differential drive robots, asking which features available before execution can best predict final wall-clock completion time. We compare SoC, total planned travel cost, primitive motion burden (how much basic motion the plan requires, such as makespan, turns, consecutive moves, and start-stop transitions), and interaction aware coordination structure (how much inter-robot coordination the plan induces, such as dependency links, interacting robot pairs, dependency depth, and crowding exposure). To test this, we generate 120 plans across 15 scenarios -- 5 Empty, 5 Medium Random, and 5 Bottleneck and execute each plan four times, yielding a 480 trial hardware corpus. Using both a scenario-held -- out ridge model and a trial-level mixed-effects model, we find that SoC alone is informative but incomplete, while primitive motion burden gives the strongest improvement, reducing held out error by about 48.6%-59.8% in MAE and 44.2%-61.4% in RMSE relative to SoC-only models. Interaction-aware coordination features add smaller, less uniform gains, most clearly in the mixed-effects analysis. Across both models and uncertainty checks, primitive motion burden is the most reliable additional signal beyond SoC, suggesting that much of the execution time gap is already visible in the offline plan before any robot starts moving.

Abstract:Multi-Agent Path Finding (MAPF) algorithms are increasingly used to plan motion for robot teams in industrial warehouses and robotic shared workspaces, but standard MAPF algorithm evaluation metrics, such as Sum of Costs (SoC), makespan, and planner runtime, can obscure how planner choices translate into realistic execution performance. We present CADENCE (Coordination and Action-Driven Estimation for Networked Continuous Execution), a hardware study of this evaluation gap on a fixed 7 by 7 workcell with seven differential drive robots, asking which features available before execution can best predict final wall-clock completion time. We compare SoC, total planned travel cost, primitive motion burden (how much basic motion the plan requires, such as makespan, turns, consecutive moves, and start-stop transitions), and interaction aware coordination structure (how much inter-robot coordination the plan induces, such as dependency links, interacting robot pairs, dependency depth, and crowding exposure). To test this, we generate 120 plans across 15 scenarios -- 5 Empty, 5 Medium Random, and 5 Bottleneck and execute each plan four times, yielding a 480 trial hardware corpus. Using both a scenario-held -- out ridge model and a trial-level mixed-effects model, we find that SoC alone is informative but incomplete, while primitive motion burden gives the strongest improvement, reducing held out error by about 48.6%-59.8% in MAE and 44.2%-61.4% in RMSE relative to SoC-only models. Interaction-aware coordination features add smaller, less uniform gains, most clearly in the mixed-effects analysis. Across both models and uncertainty checks, primitive motion burden is the most reliable additional signal beyond SoC, suggesting that much of the execution time gap is already visible in the offline plan before any robot starts moving.

Robotics (cs.RO)

arXiv:2606.04746 [cs.RO]

(or arXiv:2606.04746v1 [cs.RO] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.04746 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

aiqbench analysis

CADENCE: Predicting Realized MAPF Execution Time Beyond Sum of Costs

Related coverage