aiqbench analysis
This study evaluates TriSAR, a multi-UAV coordination system for disaster response, demonstrating that reactive collision avoidance mechanisms significantly enhance safety regardless of the underlying task-allocation strategy. The research highlights a critical trade-off where computationally intensive Genetic Algorithms offer efficiency gains only when active collision avoidance is disabled, whereas simpler greedy methods achieve comparable performance with robust safety features enabled. These findings provide essential insights into balancing computational complexity and operational safety for autonomous robot teams in high-stakes environments.
TriSAR: Task Coordination and Collision Avoidance for Aerial Robot Teams in Disaster Response
arXiv:2609.01731v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multi-Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) disaster-response systems require coordinated task assignment and local trajectory control, yet the individual and combined contributions of these coordination layers to mission efficiency and operational safety remain insufficiently characterised under controlled experimental conditions. TriSAR is evaluated as a five-UAV coordination system operating in a physics-based Gazebo simulation of an earthquake-damaged urban environment. A 2 x 2 factorial design compares two task-allocation strategies (Genetic Algorithm and greedy fitness-based allocation) with reactive collision avoidance enabled or disabled. Each of the four configurations was evaluated over 30 stochastic episodes in a common scenario of five UAVs and eight targets. Under greedy allocation, enabling repulsion eliminated recorded collision-threshold violations, confirmed by a Mann-Whitney test (U = 885, p = 4.03 x 10^-12, rank-biserial r = 0.97). Under GA allocation, the same protective effect was confirmed (U = 675, p = 1.26 x 10^-5, rank-biserial r = 0.50). For mission-efficiency metrics, GA-based allocation showed no statistically detectable advantage over greedy allocation when repulsion was enabled, but a significant advantage in steps, path length, and energy when repulsion was disabled (Welch's t-tests, |g| between 0.92 and 1.76). These results show that reactive repulsion provides a substantial, allocation-dependent safety benefit, while the additional computational complexity of GA-based task allocation yields a detectable mission-efficiency benefit only when repulsion is disabled.
Abstract:Multi-Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) disaster-response systems require coordinated task assignment and local trajectory control, yet the individual and combined contributions of these coordination layers to mission efficiency and operational safety remain insufficiently characterised under controlled experimental conditions. TriSAR is evaluated as a five-UAV coordination system operating in a physics-based Gazebo simulation of an earthquake-damaged urban environment. A 2 x 2 factorial design compares two task-allocation strategies (Genetic Algorithm and greedy fitness-based allocation) with reactive collision avoidance enabled or disabled. Each of the four configurations was evaluated over 30 stochastic episodes in a common scenario of five UAVs and eight targets. Under greedy allocation, enabling repulsion eliminated recorded collision-threshold violations, confirmed by a Mann-Whitney test (U = 885, p = 4.03 x 10^-12, rank-biserial r = 0.97). Under GA allocation, the same protective effect was confirmed (U = 675, p = 1.26 x 10^-5, rank-biserial r = 0.50). For mission-efficiency metrics, GA-based allocation showed no statistically detectable advantage over greedy allocation when repulsion was enabled, but a significant advantage in steps, path length, and energy when repulsion was disabled (Welch's t-tests, |g| between 0.92 and 1.76). These results show that reactive repulsion provides a substantial, allocation-dependent safety benefit, while the additional computational complexity of GA-based task allocation yields a detectable mission-efficiency benefit only when repulsion is disabled.
Robotics (cs.RO)
arXiv:2609.01731 [cs.RO]
(or arXiv:2609.01731v1 [cs.RO] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.01731 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 · 307 words
Related coverage
Coordinated Multi-Robot Disassembly for Makespan Optimization of Large-Scale Assemblies
arXiv · Aug 7, 2026
The Machines that Make the Machines
NVIDIA · Oct 7, 2026
Generalizable Multi-Agent Planning from Signal Temporal Logic Specifications via Diffusion
arXiv · Sep 2, 2026
The J-Space Debate, Agent Swarms, and Pacing Frontier AI - Digital Minds Newsletter #4
LessWrong · Sep 18, 2026