Papers › Line Coverage with Multiple Robots: Algorithms and Experiments
Line Coverage with Multiple Robots: Algorithms and Experiments
Saurav Agarwal, Srinivas Akella
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
The line coverage problem involves finding efficient routes for the coverage of linear features by one or more resource-constrained robots. Linear features model environments like road networks, power lines, and oil and gas pipelines. Two modes of travel are defined for robots: servicing and deadheading. A robot services a feature if it performs task-specific actions, such as taking images, as it traverses the feature; otherwise, it is deadheading. Traversing the environment incurs costs (e.g., travel time) and demands on resources (e.g., battery life). Servicing and deadheading can have different cost and demand functions, which can be direction-dependent. The environment is modeled as a graph, and an integer linear program is provided. As the problem is NP-hard, we design a fast and efficient heuristic algorithm, Merge-Embed-Merge (MEM). Exploiting the constructive property of the MEM algorithm, algorithms for line coverage of large graphs with multiple depots are developed. Furthermore, turning costs and nonholonomic constraints are efficiently incorporated into the algorithm. The algorithms are benchmarked on road networks and demonstrated in experiments with aerial robots.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections