ArticleComplex & intelligent systems2022
Path planning of a manipulator based on an improved P_RRT* algorithm.
Article in Complex & intelligent systems, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 64 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fast Path Planning for Kinematic Smoothing of Robotic Manipulator Motion.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A novel RRT*-Connect algorithm for path planning on robotic arm collision avoidance.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Path Planning Algorithm for Manipulators in Complex Scenes Based on Improved RRT.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- An Improved Harris Hawks Optimization Algorithm and Its Application in Grid Map Path Planning.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Cooperative Dynamic Motion Planning for Dual Manipulator Arms Based on RRT*Smart-AD Algorithm.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- A survey of path planning of industrial robots based on rapidly exploring random trees.Frontiers in neurorobotics · 2023Article
- Combined improved A* and greedy algorithm for path planning of multi-objective mobile robot.Scientific reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aiming to build upon the slow convergence speed and low search efficiency of the potential function-based rapidly exploring random tree star (RRT*) algorithm (P_RRT*), this paper proposes a path planning method for manipulators with an improved P_RRT* algorithm (defined as improved P_RRT*), which is used to solve the path planning problem for manipulators in three-dimensional space. This method first adopts a random sampling method based on a potential function. Second, based on a probability value, the nearest neighbour node is selected by the nearest Euclidean distance to the random sampling point and the minimum cost function, and in the expansion of new nodes, twice expansion methods are used to accelerate the search efficiency of the algorithm. The first expansion adopts the goal-biased expansion strategy, and the second expansion adopts the strategy of random sampling in a rectangular area. Then, the parent node of the new node is reselected, and the path is rerouted to obtain a clear path from the initial point to the target point. Redundant node deletion and the maximum curvature constraint are used to remove redundant nodes and minimize the curvature on the generated path to reduce the tortuosity of the path. The Bezier curve is used to fit the processed path and obtain the trajectory planning curve for the manipulator. Finally, the improved P_RRT* algorithm is verified experimentally in Python and the Robot Operating System (ROS) and compared with other algorithms. The experimental results verify the effectiveness and superiority of the improved algorithm.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.