ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Comparative Benchmark of Sampling-Based and DRL Motion Planning Methods for Industrial Robotic Arms.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Hybrid task and motion planning with reactive collision handling for multi-robot disassembly of complex products: application to EV batteries.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2026Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
This study presents a comprehensive comparison between classical sampling-based motion planners from the Open Motion Planning Library (OMPL) and a learning-based planner based on Soft Actor-Critic (SAC) for motion planning in industrial robotic arms. Using a UR3e robot equipped with an RG2 gripper, we constructed a large-scale dataset of over 100,000 collision-free trajectories generated with MoveIt-integrated OMPL planners. These trajectories were used to train a DRL agent via curriculum learning and expert demonstrations. Both approaches were evaluated on key metrics such as planning time, success rate, and trajectory smoothness. Results show that the DRL-based planner achieves higher success rates and significantly lower planning times, producing more compact and deterministic trajectories. Time-optimal parameterization using TOPPRA ensured the dynamic feasibility of all trajectories. While classical planners retain advantages in zero-shot adaptability and environmental generality, our findings highlight the potential of DRL for real-time and high-throughput motion planning in industrial contexts. This work provides practical insights into the trade-offs between traditional and learning-based planning paradigms, paving the way for hybrid architectures that combine their strengths.
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.