aiqbench analysis
This paper offers a systematic comparison of mission-specification formalisms like Behavior Trees and State Machines for complex robotic systems, addressing the critical need for scalable modeling in dynamic environments. By evaluating these tools against criteria such as expressiveness and tool support, it provides essential insights for researchers designing multi-robot missions without relying on specialized robotics software development expertise.
Formalisms for Robotic Mission Specification and Execution: A Comparative Analysis
arXiv:2603.15427v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Robots are increasingly deployed across diverse domains and designed for multi-purpose operation. As robotic systems grow in complexity and operate in dynamic environments, the need for structured, expressive, and scalable mission-specification approaches becomes critical, with mission specifications often defined in the field by domain experts rather than robotics specialists. However, there is no standard or widely accepted formalism for specifying missions in single- or multi-robot systems. A variety of formalisms, such as Behavior Trees, State Machines, Hierarchical Task Networks, and Business Process Model and Notation, have been adopted in robotics to varying degrees, each providing different levels of abstraction, expressiveness, and support for integration with human workflows and external devices. This paper presents a systematic analysis of these four formalisms with respect to their suitability for robot mission specification. Our study focuses on mission-level descriptions rather than robot software development. We analyze their underlying control structures and mission concepts, evaluate their expressiveness and limitations in modeling real-world missions, and assess the extent of available tool support. By comparing the formalisms and validating our findings with experts, we provide insights into their applicability, strengths, and shortcomings in robotic system modeling. The results aim to support practitioners and researchers in selecting appropriate modeling approaches for designing robust and adaptable robot and multi-robot missions.
Abstract:Robots are increasingly deployed across diverse domains and designed for multi-purpose operation. As robotic systems grow in complexity and operate in dynamic environments, the need for structured, expressive, and scalable mission-specification approaches becomes critical, with mission specifications often defined in the field by domain experts rather than robotics specialists. However, there is no standard or widely accepted formalism for specifying missions in single- or multi-robot systems. A variety of formalisms, such as Behavior Trees, State Machines, Hierarchical Task Networks, and Business Process Model and Notation, have been adopted in robotics to varying degrees, each providing different levels of abstraction, expressiveness, and support for integration with human workflows and external devices. This paper presents a systematic analysis of these four formalisms with respect to their suitability for robot mission specification. Our study focuses on mission-level descriptions rather than robot software development. We analyze their underlying control structures and mission concepts, evaluate their expressiveness and limitations in modeling real-world missions, and assess the extent of available tool support. By comparing the formalisms and validating our findings with experts, we provide insights into their applicability, strengths, and shortcomings in robotic system modeling. The results aim to support practitioners and researchers in selecting appropriate modeling approaches for designing robust and adaptable robot and multi-robot missions.
Software Engineering (cs.SE); Robotics (cs.RO)
arXiv:2603.15427 [cs.SE]
(or arXiv:2603.15427v2 [cs.SE] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2603.15427 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 305 words
