Papers › Solving reward-collecting problems with UAVs: a comparison of online optimization and...

Solving reward-collecting problems with UAVs: a comparison of online optimization and Q-learning

30 Nov 2021arXiv:2112.00141archive 2025-07-28

Yixuan Liu, Chrysafis Vogiatzis, Ruriko Yoshida, Erich Morman

Uncrewed autonomous vehicles (UAVs) have made significant contributions to reconnaissance and surveillance missions in past US military campaigns. As the prevalence of UAVs increases, there has also been improvements in counter-UAV technology that makes it difficult for them to successfully obtain valuable intelligence within an area of interest. Hence, it has become important that modern UAVs can accomplish their missions while maximizing their chances of survival. In this work, we specifically study the problem of identifying a short path from a designated start to a goal, while collecting all rewards and avoiding adversaries that move randomly on the grid. We also provide a possible application of the framework in a military setting, that of autonomous casualty evacuation. We present a comparison of three methods to solve this problem: namely we implement a Deep Q-Learning model, an ε-greedy tabular Q-Learning model, and an online optimization framework. Our computational experiments, designed using simple grid-world environments with random adversaries showcase how these approaches work and compare them in terms of performance, accuracy, and computational time.

PaperPDFCode

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.

Tasks

Autonomous VehiclesQ-Learning

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

Q-Learning

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