Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems

, Volume 87, Issue 2, pp 313–340 | Cite as

Cost-Based Target Selection Techniques Towards Full Space Exploration and Coverage for USAR Applications in a Priori Unknown Environments

  • E. G. Tsardoulias
  • A. Iliakopoulou
  • A. Kargakos
  • L. Petrou


Full coverage and exploration of an environment is essential in robot rescue operations where victim identification is required. Three methods of target selection towards full exploration and coverage of an unknown space oriented for Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) applications have been developed. These are the Selection of the closest topological node, the Selection of the minimum cost topological node and the Selection of the minimum cost sub-graph. All methods employ a topological graph extracted from the Generalized Voronoi Diagram (GVD), in order to select the next best target during exploration. The first method utilizes a distance metric for determining the next best target whereas the Selection of the minimum cost topological node method assigns four different weights on the graph’s nodes, based on certain environmental attributes. The Selection of the minimum cost sub-graph uses a similar technique, but instead of single nodes, sets of graph nodes are examined. In addition, a modification of A* algorithm for biased path creation towards uncovered areas, aiming at a faster spatial coverage, is introduced. The proposed methods’ performance is verified by experiments conducted in two heterogeneous simulated environments. Finally, the results are compared with two common exploration methods.


Autonomous robot Exploration Full coverage Costs Topological graph A* algorithm 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Ma, L., Yu, Y., Zhang, Y.: A skeletonization algorithm based on euclidean distance maps and morphological operators. J. Electron. (China) 18(3), 272–276 (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Calisi, D., Farinelli, A., Iocchi, L., Nardi, D.: Autonomous navigation and exploration in a rescue environment. In: Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Mobile Robotics (ECMR), pp. 110–115Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Stachniss, C., Burgard, W.: Mapping and exploration with mobile robots using coverage maps. In: IEEE/RSJ IROS, pp. 467–472 (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gonzalez-Banos, H.H., Latombe, J.C: Navigation strategies for exploring indoor environments. Int. J. Robot. Res., 829–848 (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stachniss, C., Burgard, W.: Mapping and Exploration with Mobile Robots using Coverage Maps. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Las Vegas, pp. 476–481 (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Morales, M., Tapia, L., Pearce, R., Rodriguez, S., Amato, N.M.: A machine learning approach for feature-sensitive motion planning. In: International Workshop on Algorithmic Foundations of Robotics, pp. 361–376 (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Garrido, S., Moreno, L.: Path planning for mobile robot navigation using Voronoi diagram and fast marching. In: International conference on Intelligent robots and systems, pp. 2376–2381 (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kim, J., Zhang, F., Egerstedt, M.: A provably complete exploration strategy by constructing Voronoi diagrams. In: Autonomous Robots, Nov. 2010, vol. 29, no. 3-4, pp. 367–380Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Endo, Y., Arkin, R.C.: Anticipatory robot navigation by simultaneously localizing and building a cognitive map. In: Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2003), vol. 1, pp. 460–466 (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Konolige, K., Marder-Eppstein, E., Marthi, B.: Navigation in hybrid metric-topological maps. In: 2011 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 3041–3047Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Choset, H.: Coverage for robotics A survey of recent results. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 31(1-4), 113–126 (2001)MATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Elfes, A.: Sonar-based real-world mapping and navigation. IEEE J. Robot. Autom. 3(3), 249–265 (1987)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gabriely, Y., Rimon, E.: Spanning-tree based coverage of continuous areas by a mobile robot. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 31(1-4), 77–98 (2001)MATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gabriely, Y., Rimon, E.: Competitive on-line coverage of grid environments by a mobile robot. Comput. Geom. 24(3), 197–224 (2003)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Agmon, N., Hazon, N., Kaminka, G.A., MAVERICK Group: The giving tree: constructing trees for efficient offline and online multi-robot coverage. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 52(2-4), 143–168 (2008)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hert, S., Tiwari, S., Lumelsky, V.: A terrain-covering algorithm for an AUV. In: Underwater Robots, pp. 17–45. Springer US (1996)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sachs, S., LaValle, S.M., Rajko, S.: Visibility-based pursuit-evasion in an unknown planar environment. The Int. J. Robot. Res. 23(1), 3–26 (2004)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Choset, H.: Coverage of known spaces: The boustrophedon cellular decomposition. Auton. Robot. 9(3), 247–253 (2000)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tsardoulias, E., Petrou, L.: Critical Rays Scan Match SLAM. J. Intell. Robot. Syst., 1–22 (2013)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tsardoulias, E.G., Serafi, A.T., Panourgia, M.N., Papazoglou, A., Petrou, L.: Construction of minimized topological graphs on occupancy grid maps based on GVD and sensor coverage information. J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 75(3-4), 457–474 (2014)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tsardoulias, E.G., Iliakopoulou, A., Kargakos, A., Petrou, L.: A review of global path planning methods for occupancy grid maps regardless of obstacle density. J. Intell. Robot. Syst., 1–30 (2016)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hart, P.E., Nilsson, N.J., Raphael, B.: A Formal Basis for the Heuristic Determination of Minimum Cost Paths. IEEE Transactions on Systems Science and Cybernetics 4(2), 100–107 (1968)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Carpin, S., Lewis, M., Wang, J., Balakirsky, S., Scrapper, C.: USARSim: A Robot Simulator for Research and Education. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2007, pp. 1400–1405Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gerkey, B.P., Vaughan, R.T., Howard, A.: The Player/Stage Project: Tools for Multi-Robot and Distributed Sensor Systems. In: Proceedings of the Intl. Conf. on Advanced Robotics (ICAR), Coimbra, Portugal, July 2003, pp. 317–323Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Division of Electronics and Computer EngineeringAristotle University of ThessalonikiThessalonikiGreece

Personalised recommendations