ArticleFrontiers in robotics and AI2026
Intent-driven LLM ensemble planning for flexible multi-robot manipulation.
Article in Frontiers in robotics and AI, 2026. 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.
- Research Progress on Recycling Technology of Spent Lithium-Ion Battery Electrodes: From the Perspective of Physical Separation and Intelligent Recognition.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: In this study, we address intent-driven task planning for complex multi-action manipulation sequences in heterogeneous multi-robot cells. Given a perception back-end that outputs a structured object-level scene description and a human operator's natural-language intent, we generate a precedence-consistent object-level robot-action sequence, which can then be executed by passing each such action to a lower-level motion planning module. Methods: The pipeline integrates i. perception-to-text scene encoding, ii. an ensemble of large language models (LLMs) that generate candidate action sequences based on the operator's intent, iii. an LLM-based verifier that enforces formatting and precedence constraints, and iv. a deterministic consistency filter that rejects hallucinated objects. The pipeline is evaluated on an example task in which two robot arms work collaboratively to dismantle an electric-vehicle (EV) battery for recycling applications. A variety of components must be grasped and removed in specific sequences, determined either by human instructions or by task-order feasibility decisions made by the autonomous system. Results: On 200 real scenes with 600 operator prompts across five component classes, we used metrics of full-sequence correctness and next-task correctness to evaluate and compare five LLM-based planners (including ablation analyses of pipeline components). We also evaluated the LLM-based human interface in terms of time to execution and NASA TLX using human participant experiments. On 200 real scenes and 600 prompts, full-sequence correctness improves from 0.761 (single LLM) to 0.824 (6-LLM + verifier + deterministic filter), and next-object correctness improves from 0.866 to 0.894. Discussion: Results in our case study indicate that our ensemble-with-verification approach reliably maps operator intent to safe multi-robot plans while maintaining low user effort.
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.