electronics

Article
A UGV Path Planning Algorithm Based on Improved A* with
Improved Artificial Potential Field
Xianchen Meng and Xi Fang *

School of Science, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430070, China; [email protected]

* Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +86-135-5401-6042

Abstract: Aiming at the problem of difficult obstacle avoidance for unmanned ground vehicles
(UGVs) in complex dynamic environments, an improved A*-APF algorithm (BA*-MAPF algorithm)
is proposed in this paper. Addressing the A* algorithm’s challenges of lengthy paths, excess nodes,
and lack of smoothness, the BA*-MAPF algorithm integrates a bidirectional search strategy, applies
interpolation to remove redundant nodes, and uses cubic B-spline curves for path smoothing. To
rectify the traditional APF algorithm’s issues with local optimization and ineffective dynamic obstacle
avoidance, the BA*-MAPF algorithm revises the gravitational field function by incorporating a
distance factor, and fine-tunes the repulsive field function to vary with distance. This adjustment
ensures a reduction in gravitational force as distance increases and moderates the repulsive force near
obstacles, facilitating more effective local path planning and dynamic obstacle navigation. Through
our experimental analysis, the BA*-MAPF algorithm has been validated to significantly outperform
existing methods in achieving optimal path planning and dynamic obstacle avoidance, thereby
markedly boosting path planning efficiency in varied scenarios.

Keywords: Unmanned Ground Vehicle (UGV); A* algorithm; Artificial Potential Field algorithm
(APF); BA*-MAPF; path planning; dynamic obstacle avoidance

1. Introduction
In contemporary society, as productivity continues to develop at a rapid pace, people
Citation: Meng, X.; Fang, X. A UGV continue to create more and more tools to generate more value for society more conve-
Path Planning Algorithm Based on niently [1]. With the rise in the standard of living, the number of automobiles has also
Improved A* with Improved Artificial increased, contributing to economic development but also leading to serious safety issues
Potential Field. Electronics 2024, 13, and social challenges. Notably, about one-fifth of the annual death data worldwide is
972. https://doi.org/10.3390/ attributed to traffic accidents [2], underscoring the urgency of finding more reliable ways
electronics13050972 to improve or replace human driving behavior. This quest has made the development of
Academic Editor: Felipe Jiménez
Unmanned Ground Vehicles (UGVs) a research hotspot in the automotive field, especially
with the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence technology, crucial for reducing road
Received: 22 January 2024 traffic accidents [3]. UGV technology, evolving within this context, has become a significant
Revised: 27 February 2024 focus for both traditional automakers and emerging vehicle builders.
Accepted: 28 February 2024 The core functional modules of a UGV include behavioral decision-making, environ-
Published: 3 March 2024
ment sensing, path planning, and tracking control [4]. These modules work in tandem
to enable UGVs to provide safe, reliable, and efficient driving behavior in complex envi-
ronments. The application of UGVs in production and daily life can significantly enhance
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.
travel and transportation efficiency, and effectively mitigate the risk of traffic accidents.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. Path planning technology, relying on the sensing equipment aboard UGVs, plays a critical
This article is an open access article role in developing a planning scheme from the current location to the target location, based
distributed under the terms and on the collection and analysis of environmental information [5]. With increasing interest in
conditions of the Creative Commons UGVs, the path planning problem has emerged as a challenging task within the field of
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// navigation research [6].
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ However, heuristic algorithms, as a primary approach to path planning, exhibit
4.0/). significant limitations in addressing the diversity and complexity of practical application

Electronics 2024, 13, 972. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics13050972 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/electronics

Electronics 2024, 13, 972 2 of 33

environments. These traditional heuristic algorithms struggle to meet the requirements

of more complex path planning scenarios due to inherent limitations [7–9]. For instance,
Shengmin Zhao et al. [7] proposed an innovative full-coverage path planning (CCPP)
method, effectively addressing the dynamic tracking problem and solving multi-obstacle
challenges in complex environments. This method significantly improves the coverage of
the planned path, achieving a high level of 98% through simulation experiments. Similarly,
Hub Ali et al. [8] focused on the UAV path planning and obstacle avoidance problems in
a 3D terrain, proposing a trajectory planning technique capable of implementing global
and local path planning for UAVs under static and dynamic constraints. This method
demonstrates superior performance in handling complex terrain situations, significantly
outperforming other 3D UAV path planning techniques. Guojun Ma et al. [9] introduced
a new path planning algorithm, the Path Planning Probabilistic Smoothing Bidirectional
Randomized Tree Algorithm (PSBi-RRT), addressing the issues of the disordered initial
solutions and slow convergence found in the Bidirectional Rapid Exploration Randomized
Tree (Bi-RRT). The proposed algorithm achieves excellent performance and higher planning
efficiency in various environments through several simulation experiments.
In complex dynamic environments, traditional single-path planning algorithms fail to
meet multiple requirements, such as path length, time, and smoothness, rendering them
ineffective for real-world applications. This has prompted scholars to explore the combina-
tion of two or more algorithms to overcome these challenges [10–12]. Wei Zhang et al. [10]
investigated an AUV path planning algorithm based on A* + APF (AplusPF), which not
only plans paths safely but also ensures the paths are reliable and trackable, significantly
improving the algorithm’s efficiency. Vikas et al. [11] explored a hybrid path planning algo-
rithm for humanoid robots in rugged terrain, combining a memory-based GSA model with
a differential perturbation velocity method. This approach yields optimal path planning re-
sults, demonstrating high efficiency and feasibility in environments with dynamic obstacles.
YuMin Su et al. [12] proposed the Constraint Locked Sweep Method with Velocity Obstacle
(CLSM-VO) for unmanned vessel operation in complex dynamic maritime environments,
capable of handling complex maritime traffic scenarios and generating smooth and safe
trajectory planning.
The motivation for this work is to address the specific limitations and gaps in existing
path planning methods. Despite significant advancements made by various researchers [7–12],
a comprehensive solution that efficiently and effectively tackles the challenges of dynamic
and complex environments remains elusive. This paper introduces the BA*-MAPF algorithm,
designed to surmount the limitations of existing path planning algorithms by offering a more
adaptable, efficient, and reliable solution for UGVs navigating complex environments.
The main contributions of this paper are as follows:
1. A grid environment model has been developed to tackle the complexities of path
planning in environments laden with both dynamic and static obstacles. This model
serves as a foundational framework for navigating through intricate spaces, providing
a systematic approach to identifying optimal paths amidst varying obstacles;
2. Introducing a bidirectional search strategy into the traditional A* algorithm to over-
come the inherent limitations of the A* algorithm in global path planning, such as the
tendency to produce excessively long paths, the need for extended search times, and
the production of paths with less than optimal smoothness. This approach greatly
reduces the search time of the algorithm, improves its efficiency, solves the draw-
backs of the traditional algorithm, and optimizes the pathfinding process for better
performance and better navigation;
3. We modify the potential field function and introduce a distance factor to address the
shortcomings of the APF algorithm in terms of target unreachability and local minima.
The simulation results show that the improved algorithm overcomes the problems
of local minima and target unreachability, enabling the UGV to safely reach the end
point during the obstacle avoidance process of path planning;
Electronics 2024, 13, 972 3 of 33

4. Utilizing the advantages of the A* algorithm in global path planning, as well as its
faster search path and simplicity, and APF algorithm for local path planning with high
real-time performance and good local obstacle avoidance effect is combined with the
improved A* algorithm (BA* algorithm), and the BA*-MAPF algorithm is proposed.
The simulation verification shows that the BA*-MAPF algorithm has good results;
5. The proposed algorithm is compared with the GA algorithm, PSO algorithm, GWO
algorithm, A* algorithm and APF algorithm in a predefined grid environment model,
and the comprehensive performance of the proposed algorithm is illustrated in terms
of evaluation metrics such as the path length, the computation time, the number
of corners, the cumulative corners, and the smoothness in terms of the stability
and robustness.
Section 2 briefly reviews the existing literature on path planning for intelligent systems.
Section 3 describes the UGV path planning model. Section 4 describes the construction
details of the BA*-MAPF algorithm. Section 5 presents simulation results and provides a
comparative analysis of the discussed algorithms, emphasizing the performance metrics
of these algorithms. Finally, Section 6 summarizes the main ideas of the paper and new
contributions to the field of path planning.

2. Related Work
Currently, in most cases, various heuristic algorithms are still used to solve the path
planning problem. Path planning methods for UGV are usually categorized into two main
groups: traditional search algorithms and intelligent bionic algorithms.
Zhang et al. [13] introduced a pioneering real-time navigation strategy for unmanned
surface vehicles (USVs) to navigate complex environments with multiple obstacles. Lever-
aging Artificial Potential Field (APF) technology and Differential Vector Field (DVF) guid-
ance principles, their approach focuses on safe, efficient path planning and multi-obstacle
avoidance. This innovative combination enhances USV’s ability to track targets effectively
while navigating through unpredictably dynamic spaces, representing a significant ad-
vancement in autonomous maritime navigation. Josu Agirrebeitia et al. [14] crafted a
novel UAV path planning algorithm utilizing the Artificial Potential Field (APF) method,
tailored for obstacle-laden environments. This algorithm stands out for its adept obstacle
avoidance in intricate settings, showcasing remarkable efficiency in both two-dimensional
and three-dimensional spaces. Their contribution signifies a significant leap in UAV navi-
gation technology, offering enhanced maneuverability across diverse spatial challenges.
Wolfgang Fink et al. [15] developed a multi-objective extended Dijkstra algorithm based
on terrain data to cope with the problem of rover path planning that requires extensive
time-consuming manual surface terrain analysis. The algorithm was optimized for multiple
constraint conditions, creating favorable conditions for scientific research and investiga-
tion. Yong Ma et al. [16] proposed an IBA* algorithm for the coverage path planning of
unmanned ground surveying vehicles, which overcomes the problem of insufficient conti-
nuity in the BA* algorithm through task decomposition and dynamic mapping updates.
Experiments have shown that this algorithm can effectively ensure the safety of UGV
during map mapping. Shanen Yu et al. [17] introduced the SOF-RRT* algorithm, designed
to boost UAV navigation efficiency in complex areas. Key benefits include shorter, smoother
paths, fewer random tree nodes, and fewer iterations needed for planning. This algorithm
significantly cuts down iteration numbers, reduces path lengths, and quickens convergence,
marking a notable improvement over traditional path planning methods. SOF-RRT* stands
out by offering enhanced navigation efficiency and performance enhancements in UAV
path planning. Qingyang Gao et al. [18] developed the BP-RRT algorithm, blending back
propagation neural networks with an optimized rapidly expanding random tree (RRT)
algorithm for robotic path planning. This approach addresses the inefficiency and high
computational demands of navigating a six-degree-of-freedom robotic arm through com-
plex 3D environments filled with obstacles. The BP-RRT algorithm strategically partitions
the sampling space and adjusts sampling probabilities for more effective local sampling,
Electronics 2024, 13, 972 4 of 33

particularly in dynamic or obstacle-rich areas. Experimental simulations have shown its

superior performance and adaptability across various conditions, outpacing traditional
path planning methods and demonstrating marked improvements in speed against compa-
rable RRT* algorithms. Jiaming Fan et al. [19] innovated a UAV trajectory planning method
using a dual-track APF-RRT (Artificial Potential Field-Rapid Exploration Randomized Tree)
algorithm to address the limitations of traditional RRT algorithms, such as redundancy,
multiple iterations, and excessively long paths. Their approach significantly improves the
tree-growth search performance and computational efficiency in path planning, while sub-
stantially improving the quality of the planned paths. They used an improved bi-directional
APF-RRT strategy to increase efficiency and path planning quality, thus optimizing UAV
navigation strategies in complex environments. Yanming Liang et al. [20] introduced the
CCPF-RRT* algorithm, an innovative extension of the Rapid Exploration Random Tree Star
(RRT*) focused on heuristic optimal path planning. This method is designed to boost robotic
navigation efficiency in dense and complex settings by employing a potential function-
based strategy for path optimization. Key advancements include the algorithm’s ability
to guide robots through crowded spaces with optimal paths, enhancing overall efficiency
and minimizing the cost of navigation. The CCPF-RRT* has shown remarkable capabilities
in swiftly generating initial solutions, achieving rapid convergence, and crafting low-cost
motion paths in intricate environments.
Chengzhi Qu et al. [21] developed a novel hybrid algorithm, HSGWO-MSOS, which
integrates elements of the gray wolf optimization (GWO) and the symbiotic organisms
search (SOS) algorithms. This innovative approach simplifies GWO to maintain its ex-
ploratory strength while significantly boosting convergence speed beyond the traditional
GWO benchmarks. Additionally, the SOS algorithm’s symbiosis phase has been tailored
for enhanced efficiency. The performance of the HSGWO-MSOS algorithm is meticulously
evaluated using the linear difference equation method, revealing its exceptional ability to
identify optimal paths efficiently. This hybrid algorithm stands out for its rapid execution
and superior performance, making it a groundbreaking solution for UAV path planning in
challenging environments. Imanshu Gupta et al. [22] proposed a novel hybrid optimiza-
tion algorithm, known as HCPSOA, where they combined Particle Swarm Optimization
(PSO) and Gray Wolf Optimization (COA). The goal of the algorithm is to overcome the
difficulty of estimating the flight trajectory of an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) under
various constraints with acceptable accuracy and time span in a complex 3D environment.
It improved convergence speed, reduced the possibility of local minimum value reductions,
and overcame the limitations of COA and PSO. The results of the simulation experiments
show that HCPSOA estimates better and safer flight paths with fewer iterations, and the
ability to search for flight paths has been greatly improved. Yan Ma et al. [23] crafted an
advanced hybrid algorithm inspired by the flame ant colony concept, designed specifi-
cally for unmanned underwater vehicle (UUV) path planning. This innovative approach
aims to address the difficulties UUVs encounter when moving through environments
affected by ocean currents and physical obstacles. Through simulation experiments, the
algorithm has proven its ability to efficiently determine optimal paths within complex
marine settings, significantly improving UUV navigation under challenging underwater
conditions. Zheng Wang et al. [24] have developed a novel hybrid algorithm that synergizes
global and local path planning techniques, tailored for complex marine navigation. This
approach leverages an Enhanced Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) algorithm to carve
out an optimized global route, complemented by an advanced Artificial Potential Field
(APF) algorithm for dynamic obstacle avoidance, fine-tuning the path based on global
insights. This dual-strategy algorithm adeptly meets the dual challenges of optimizing
paths and navigating around dynamic obstacles, significantly improving the operational
efficiency of unmanned boats in intricate offshore environments. By integrating these
improved algorithms, Zheng Wang et al. offer a sophisticated solution that boosts the
navigational capabilities of unmanned marine vessels, facilitating their successful mission
execution in demanding marine settings. Zhiheng Yu et al. [25] have developed a unique al-
Electronics 2024, 13, 972 5 of 33

gorithm that combines the water flow potential field method with the beetle antenna search
strategy, aiming to overcome the limitations inherent in the standalone beetle antenna
search method, such as local optimization pitfalls, general inefficiency, and inadequate
obstacle navigation during path planning. Through rigorous simulation experiments, this
integrated approach has proven to significantly enhance path planning capabilities, yield-
ing benefits like shortened planning durations, superior path optimization, and effective
circumvention of local optima. This novel algorithm marks a notable advancement in
the domain of mobile robot path planning, successfully addressing prevalent challenges
by harnessing the synergistic potential of merging two distinct navigational strategies to
derive markedly improved outcomes. Lianghan Zeng et al. [26] crafted a path planning
methodology designed to anticipate ground threats, employing the Artificial Bee Colony
(ABC) algorithm enhanced by a collaborative thinking strategy. This approach focuses
on mitigating the adverse effects of incomplete ground threat data on the path planning
of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs). Through simulation experiments, their method
has been validated to secure safe flight paths for UAVs, proving its efficacy in environ-
ments where ground threat information is not only incomplete but also subject to dynamic
changes. Tiancheng Wang et al. [27] critiqued the conventional Ant Colony Optimization
(ACO) algorithms for correlating pheromone concentration with path length, leading to
redundancies, and innovatively introduced a Monte Carlo-based Improved Ant Colony
Optimization Algorithm (MC-IACO) tailored for welding robot path planning. Through
simulation experiments, MC-IACO was shown to significantly outperform both traditional
and other enhanced algorithms in optimizing path planning for welding robots, showcasing
superior efficiency and precision. This advancement addresses common pitfalls in existing
ship path planning algorithms, such as slow convergence, unnecessary detours, and rough
path formation, which compromise navigational effectiveness and safety. To address these
issues, Qiyong Gu et al. [28] developed the PI-DP-RRT method, a novel approach aimed
at enhancing ship path planning. This method promises significant improvements by
streamlining the path planning process, notably increasing both efficiency and accuracy, re-
ducing the frequency of turns, and thereby elevating the overall safety and efficiency of ship
navigation. Through simulation experiments, the PI-DP-RRT method has demonstrated its
ability to effectively resolve the shortcomings of existing algorithms. Xiaohong Li et al. [29]
crafted an advanced compression factor particle swarm optimization algorithm tailored for
Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUVs), designed to navigate through difficult currents
and obstacles, producing safe and smooth three-dimensional paths. Their experimental
findings underscore substantial enhancements in both the efficiency and quality of path
planning, marking a pivotal advancement in AUV navigation by significantly optimizing
for safety, smoothness, and expedited planning capabilities. Chao Liu et al. [30] observed
that the traditional ACO algorithm suffers from problems such as inefficient search and
easy stagnation. Therefore, they proposed a new variant of ACO called Improved Heuris-
tic Mechanism ACO (IHMACO). Simulation experiments show that IHMACO is highly
practical and efficient in practical applications, and can obtain the optimal solution of the
corresponding path planning problem. This method provides an effective improvement
program for path planning.
Researchers have made notable advancements in traditional search and intelligent
bionic algorithms for UGV path planning, significantly boosting their efficiency across
diverse, complex scenarios. However, despite these improvements, certain algorithms still
exhibit drawbacks, such as failing to secure optimal or near-optimal paths in dynamic envi-
ronments, generating paths that lack smoothness, and featuring excessive rotation angles.
These shortcomings underscore the challenges in adapting these algorithms for practi-
cal, real-world applications where the demand for efficiency and navigational precision
is paramount.
 angles. These shortcomings underscore the challenges in adapting these algorithms for
Electronics 2024, 13, 972 practical, real-world applications where the demand for efficiency and navigational 6pre-
of 33
cision is paramount.

3.
3.UGV
UGVPathPathPlanning
PlanningModeling
Modeling
Before
Before a UGV performspath
a UGV performs pathplanning,
planning,the theinitial
initialtask
taskisisprocessing
processingthe thesurrounding
surrounding
environmental
environmentalinformation.
information.Indeed,
Indeed, there is aissignificant
there a significantcorrelation
correlationbetween
betweenthe accuracy
the accu-
of environmental
racy of environmentalinformation and the
information speed
and the and
speed efficiency of UGVof
and efficiency path
UGV planning. There-
path planning.
fore, meticulously processing this environmental information
Therefore, meticulously processing this environmental information is crucial. is crucial.
The
The grid
grid method
method stands out as
stands out as one
oneof ofthe
themost
mostprevalent
prevalentmap mapmodeling
modelingtechniques
techniques in
in static networks. This approach subdivides the 2D map environment
static networks. This approach subdivides the 2D map environment into independent cells into independent
cells
usingusing polygons
polygons of specific
of specific shapes,
shapes, ensuring
ensuring eacheach
cellcell connects
connects to others
to others without
without over-
overlap.
lap. These cells are commonly referred to as grids. Within the same
These cells are commonly referred to as grids. Within the same map environment, utilizing map environment,
utilizing shorter
shorter edges foredges for grid segmentation
grid segmentation enhancesenhances
the accuracy the of
accuracy of path planning.
path planning. However,
However, it concurrently extends the computation time
it concurrently extends the computation time required for path search. Forrequired for path search. For in-
instance, as
stance,
depicted in Figure 1, the white grid marks the feasible region, whereas the blackblack
as depicted in Figure 1, the white grid marks the feasible region, whereas the grid
grid signifies
signifies the occupied
the occupied grid,grid, representing
representing obstacles.
obstacles. A blueA blue six-pointed
six-pointed star marks
star marks the
the start
start
point,point,
and aandreda five-pointed
red five-pointed
star star indicates
indicates the end
the end point,
point, withwith the UGV
the UGV freefree to nav-
to navigate
igate
withinwithin the feasible
the feasible area. area.

Figure
Figure1.1.Raster
Rastermap.
map.

Inthe
In the3D3Dspace,
space,the
the whole
wholeplane
planeisis divided
dividedbybyaa square
square grid,
grid, the
the height
height value
valueofofthe
the
grid is reset, and the numbers of columns, rows and layers of the grid are
grid is reset, and the numbers of columns, rows and layers of the grid are determined bydetermined by
combining with the actual terrain data. Figure 2 shows the valleys and peaks
combining with the actual terrain data. Figure 2 shows the valleys and peaks in a matrix, in a matrix,
andthe
and thedifferent
differentvalues
valueson
onthe
thematrix
matrixindicate
indicatethetheelevation
elevationatatthe
thecoordinates,
coordinates,after
afterwhich
which
the terrain is smoothed using the interpolation
the terrain is smoothed using the interpolation method. method.
In grid maps, we generally categorize grids into two types: white grids (free passage is
allowed) and black grids (free passage is prohibited). There are two general search methods
for UGV in grid maps, namely, four-neighbor search and eight-neighbor search, where the
black dots indicate the optional nodes of the UGV and the arrows indicate the movable
directions of the UGV, as shown in Figure 3. as shown in Figure 3. From the perspective of
path search time, four-neighbor search entails half the computational cost of eight-neighbor
search, and therefore takes less time. From the perspective of the feasibility and length of
the path, the four-neighbor search path has more turning curves than the eight-neighbor
search path, and each turning is at a 90 degree right angle, which is not friendly to the
actual motion of the UGV. The eight-neighbor search path can be planned through the
Electronics 2024, 13, 972 7 of 33

Electronics 2024, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 35

diagonal lines of the grid, and the path length is better than that of the four-neighbor search
path. Therefore, in this study, the grid map adopts an eight-neighbor search method.

Figure 2. 3D digital terrain coding matrix.

In grid maps, we generally categorize grids into two types: white grids (free passage
is allowed) and black grids (free passage is prohibited). There are two general search
methods for UGV in grid maps, namely, four-neighbor search and eight-neighbor search,
where the black dots indicate the optional nodes of the UGV and the arrows indicate the
movable directions of the UGV, as shown in Figure 3. as shown in Figure 3. From the
perspective of path search time, four-neighbor search entails half the computational cost
of eight-neighbor search, and therefore takes less time. From the perspective of the feasi-
bility and length of the path, the four-neighbor search path has more turning curves than
the eight-neighbor search path, and each turning is at a 90 degree right angle, which is not
friendly to the actual motion of the UGV. The eight-neighbor search path can be planned
through the diagonal lines of the grid, and the path length is better than that of the four-
neighbor search path. Therefore, in this study, the grid map adopts an eight-neighbor
Figuremethod.
Figure
search 2. 3D
2. 3D digital
digital terrain
terrain coding
coding matrix.
matrix.

In grid maps, we generally categorize grids into two types: white grids (free passage
is allowed) and black grids (free passage is prohibited). There are two general search
methods for UGV in grid maps, namely, four-neighbor search and eight-neighbor search,
where the black dots indicate the optional nodes of the UGV and the arrows indicate the
movable directions of the UGV, as shown in Figure 3. as shown in Figure 3. From the
perspective of path search time, four-neighbor search entails half the computational cost
of eight-neighbor search, and therefore takes less time. From the perspective of the feasi-
bility and length of the path, the four-neighbor search path has more turning curves than
the eight-neighbor search path, and each turning is at a 90 degree right angle, which is not
friendly to the actual motion of the UGV. The eight-neighbor search path can be planned
through the diagonal lines of the grid, and the path length is better than that of the four-
neighbor search path. Therefore, in this study, the grid map adopts an eight-neighbor
search method.

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure3.3.A*A*
algorithm for for
algorithm searching neighborhoods.
searching (a) Four
neighborhoods. (a) neighbors per search.
Four neighbors (b) Eight
per search. (b)neigh-
Eight
bors per search.
neighbors per search.

The operational dynamics of UGV hold significant importance in the development of

an effective path for obstacle avoidance during the path planning process. To facilitate the
simulation of the UGV motion, a coordinate system designated as OXY is established, with
its operational mechanics illustrated in Figure 4. Within this framework, UGVs are concep-
tualized as particles executing motion in a stepwise manner, their movement confined to
adjacent units within the environmental layout showcased in Figures 1 and 2. The strat-
egy for navigating through this environment incorporates the eight-neighborhood search
method, granting the UGV a spectrum of eight possible directions for movement, namely,
up, down, left, right, and the four diagonals (up-left, down-left, up-right, down-right), as
meticulously outlined in Figure 3. This methodological approach to UGV path planning
(a) (b)
Figure 3. A* algorithm for searching neighborhoods. (a) Four neighbors per search. (b) Eight neigh-
bors per search.
 conceptualized as particles executing motion in a stepwise manner, their movement con-
fined to adjacent units within the environmental layout showcased in Figures 1 and 2. The
strategy for navigating through this environment incorporates the eight-neighborhood
search method, granting the UGV a spectrum of eight possible directions for movement,
Electronics 2024, 13, 972 namely, up, down, left, right, and the four diagonals (up-left, down-left, up-right, down-
8 of 33
right), as meticulously outlined in Figure 3. This methodological approach to UGV path
planning underscores the pivotal role of the vehicle’s motion state in circumventing ob-
stacles, employing
underscores a systematic
the pivotal progression
role of the vehicle’swithin
motiona state
meticulously defined coordinate
in circumventing obstacles,sys-
em-
tem, andacapitalizing
ploying on the flexibility
systematic progression afforded
within by an eight-directional
a meticulously movement
defined coordinate capac-
system, and
ity.
capitalizing on the flexibility afforded by an eight-directional movement capacity.

Schematic diagram
Figure 4. Schematic diagram of UGV motion.

4. Design of the BA*-MAPF Algorithm

4. Design of the BA*-MAPF Algorithm
4.1. Bidirectional Alternating Search Strategy of A* Algorithm
4.1. Bidirectional Alternating Search Strategy of A* Algorithm
4.1.1. Traditional A* Algorithm
4.1.1. Traditional A* Algorithm
The A* algorithm represents a sophisticated evolution of Dijkstra’s algorithm and
the BFSThe(breadth-first
A* algorithm represents a sophisticated
search) algorithm, evolution
ingeniously of Dijkstra’s
amalgamating algorithm
their and the
best attributes
BFS
to efficiently ascertain the shortest path, although it is traditionally not as efficient to
(breadth-first search) algorithm, ingeniously amalgamating their best attributes as ef-
its
ficiently ascertain the shortest path, although it is traditionally not as
individual predecessors. Unlike the BFS algorithm, which adopts a greedy search strategy efficient as its indi-
vidual predecessors.
that favors Unlike
nodes nearer tothetheBFS algorithm,
goal whichon
purely based adopts a greedy searchhastening
distance—thereby strategy thatthe
favors
search nodes nearer
but at the risktoofthe goal purely
settling based on distance—thereby
for less-than-ideal hastening
paths—the A* algorithm the searcha
introduces
but at the cost
nuanced risk of settlingfor
function forevaluating
less-than-ideal
nodes,paths—the A* algorithm
thereby refining introduces
the path a nuanced
selection process.
cost function for
The hallmark evaluating
of the nodes,lies
A* algorithm thereby refining the
in its heuristic path selection
function, a strategicprocess.
mechanismThe hall-
that
mark
steers of
thethe A* algorithm
search expansionlies in its towards
directly heuristicthefunction,
target. aThis
strategic mechanism
not only amplifies that steers
the search
the searchbut
efficiency expansion directly the
also guarantees towards the target.
discovery This notpossible
of the shortest only amplifies
path. Inthe search
essence, theeffi-
A*
algorithm
ciency but synthesizes the core
also guarantees the strengths
discoveryofofboth Dijkstra’spossible
the shortest and BFSpath.
algorithms, leveraging
In essence, the A*
a cost function
algorithm alongside
synthesizes theacore
heuristic search
strengths ofstrategy to strikeand
both Dijkstra’s a harmonious balance
BFS algorithms, between
leveraging
asearch efficiencyalongside
cost function and the attainment
a heuristicofsearch
optimal pathfinding
strategy solutions.
to strike The costbalance
a harmonious functionbe- is
shown search
tween below: efficiency and the attainment of optimal pathfinding solutions. The cost
function is shown below: f (n) = g(n) + h(n) (1)
where n is the current point, f (n) is the total generation value of the current point n, g(n)
denotes the actual generation value from the initial point to this point in position n, and
h(n) denotes the generation value from the current point n to the end point.
The cost function calculates the distance between two positions, h(n) is the specific em-
bodiment of the heuristic information in the cost function, and so far the usual methods for
calculating the heuristic are Manhattan distance, Chebyshev distance, Euclidean distance
and so on. If the node is located at location ( xn , yn ) and the target point is located at location
( xqgoal , yqgoal ), then the Euclidean distance can be calculated using the following formula:
q q
h(n) = ( xqgoal − xn )2 + (yqgoal − yn )2 (2)
Electronics 2024, 13, 972 9 of 33

The Manhattan distance function between ( xn , yn ) and ( xq goal , yq goal ) can be expressed
as follows:
h(n) = xq goal − xn + yq goal − yn (3)

The Chebyshev distance function between ( xn , yn ) and ( xq goal , yq goal ) can be expressed
as follows: n o
h(n) = max xq goal − xn , yq goal − yn (4)

In this study, we use the Euclidean distance function as a heuristic function to estimate
the straight line distance between two coordinate points.
Despite its effectiveness, the A* algorithm shows several limitations, particularly in
environments dense with obstacles or in scenarios requiring long-distance pathfinding. In
such cases, the algorithm’s performance can be significantly diminished due to an increased
number of nodes to be searched, leading to longer search times and reduced efficiency.
These limitations manifest as follows:
1. Increased search time in obstacle-dense environments—When navigating through
areas with numerous obstacles, the A* algorithm may require additional time to
circumnavigate these barriers, resulting in an extended search process;
2. Rapid growth in search nodes for longer paths—For extensive search paths, the expo-
nential increase in potential nodes escalates the computational demand, prolonging
the search duration and impacting the algorithm’s practical applicability.
To address these challenges, this paper introduces a bidirectional search strategy
aimed at refining the A* algorithm. This innovative approach is designed to mitigate the
identified limitations by enhancing the algorithm’s ability to efficiently manage scenarios
characterized by numerous obstacles. The bidirectional search strategy not only accelerates
the search process by concurrently expanding from the start and end points, but also
reduces the search space, thereby diminishing the computational load and search time.
This adjustment is particularly effective in complex environments, enabling the algorithm
to maintain high levels of efficiency and accuracy in pathfinding tasks.

4.1.2. Design of the Bidirectional Alternating Search Strategy

The conventional A* algorithm, while effective in its primary objective, often falls
prey to the inefficiency of extensively searching unnecessary nodes during the pathfinding
process, thereby augmenting the time required to ascertain the optimal path. To mitigate
this inefficiency, an innovative bidirectional search strategy has been adopted. This method-
ology entails conducting searches in both forward and reverse directions concurrently,
with the forward search progressing from the starting point towards the target, and the
reverse search moving from the target back to the starting point. A key feature of this
refined approach is the utilization of dynamic target points within both the forward and
reverse searches. Specifically, the current node in one search operation is designated as
the temporary target for the opposing search, creating a dynamic and responsive search
environment. This strategic adjustment not only bolsters computational efficiency by min-
imizing the exploration of non-essential nodes, but also substantially lowers the overall
cost associated with the path planning task. The corresponding forward search and reverse
search evaluation functions are as follows:

f 1 ( n ) = g1 ( n ) + h 1 ( n ) (5)

f 2 ( n ) = g2 ( n ) + h 2 ( n ) (6)
When the algorithm runs, the path endpoints N and G are used as the initial points
for forward and backward searching. During forward routing, from point N to point G,
points N and G are used as the starting and ending points for forward routing, and the
optimal node N1 is generated. At this point, the algorithm switches from forward path
finding to reverse path finding, from point G to point N. At this point, point G and point N1
 When the algorithm runs, the path endpoints N and G are used as the initial
points for forward and backward searching. During forward routing, from point N to
point G , points N and G are used as the starting and ending points for forward rout-
ing, and the optimal node N1 is generated. At this point, the algorithm switches from
Electronics 2024, 13, 972 forward path finding to reverse path finding, from point G to point N . At this point,
10 of 33
point G and point N1 generated by the forward path finding alone are used as the
starting and ending points for the reverse search, and the optimal G1 is generated again.
generated by the forward path finding alone are used as the starting and ending points for
After severalsearch,
the reverse repeated
andsearches,
the optimaltheGoptimal nodes generated in the forward and reverse
1 is generated again. After several repeated searches,
directions will overlap, and the line between this
the optimal nodes generated in the forward and reverse point and the starting
directions and ending
will overlap, points
and the line
is the optimal
between path.and
this point Thethe
flowchart
startingof theending
and bidirectional search
points is strategy
the optimal of the
path. TheA*flowchart
algorithmof
is shown
the in Figure
bidirectional 5. strategy of the A* algorithm is shown in Figure 5.
search

Figure 5.
Figure Theflow
5. The flowchart
chartof
ofthe
thebidirectional
bidirectional search
search strategy
strategy of
of the
the A*
A* algorithm.
algorithm.

As shown in Figure 5, the target point is changed every time during forward and
reverse searching, which can cause the forward and reverse search paths to approach
quickly. The synchronized bidirectional search ends when the extended node extendNode1
of the current node in the forward search encounters the current node currentNode2 of
the current node in the reverse search, or the extended node extendNode2 of the current
node in the reverse search encounters the current node currentNode1 of the current node
in the forward search. The synchronized bidirectional search method greatly reduces the
search time and improves the search efficiency during the search process, but it still has
some drawbacks. For example, when one of the forward or reverse searches deviates from
the optimal path, the other one will immediately deviate from it too.

4.2. Modified Potential Field Function of APF

4.2.1. Traditional APF Algorithm
Figure 6 shows the force analysis when the UGV enters the range of action of the
obstacle, where Frep indicates the obstacle repulsive force on the UGV, Fatt indicates the
gravitational force on the end point on the UGV, and Ftotal indicates the combined force on
the UGV, that is, the direction in which the UGV is actually moving.
 4.2.1. Traditional APF Algorithm
Figure 6 shows the force analysis when the UGV enters the range of action of the
obstacle, where Frep indicates the obstacle repulsive force on the UGV, Fatt indicates
Electronics 2024, 13, 972 the gravitational force on the end point on the UGV, and Ftotal indicates the combined
11 of 33
force on the UGV, that is, the direction in which the UGV is actually moving.

Figure 6.
Figure Force diagram
6. Force diagram of
of aa UGV
UGV in
in an
an artificial
artificial potential
potential field.
field.

The Artificial Potential Field (APF) principle introduces a nuanced conceptual frame-
The Artificial Potential Field (APF) principle introduces a nuanced conceptual frame-
work for navigating UGV, predicated on the interaction between repulsive forces emanat-
work for navigating UGV, predicated on the interaction between repulsive forces emanat-
ing from obstacles and attractive forces directed towards the destination. This dual-force
ing from obstacles and attractive forces directed towards the destination. This dual-force
mechanism plays a pivotal role in steering the UGV away from potential hazards while
mechanism plays a pivotal role in steering the UGV away from potential hazards while
simultaneously guiding it towards its intended goal. Potential fields are categorized into
simultaneously guiding it towards its intended goal. Potential fields are categorized into
gravitational and repulsive potential fields. Gravitational potential energy comes from the
gravitational and repulsive potential fields. Gravitational potential energy comes from the
allure of the destination, an attraction towards the goal, while repulsive potential energy
allure of the destination, an attraction towards the goal, while repulsive potential energy
comes from the distance and configuration of the obstacles, and is used to steer the UGV
comes from the distance and configuration of the obstacles, and is used to steer the UGV
away from potential hazards. The essence of APF-based navigation lies in the delicate bal-
away from potential
ance between hazards. The
these opposing essence
forces. of APF-based
This balance ensuresnavigation lies in
that the UGV isthe delicate bal-
simultaneously
ance between these opposing forces. This balance ensures that the UGV is simultaneously
attracted to the destination and repelled by nearby obstacles, thus bypassing them to reach
attracted to the
the intended destination
goal. and repelled
The calculation by nearby
formula obstacles, thus bypassing them to reach
is as follows:
the intended goal. The calculation formula is as follows:
1
Uatt (q) = 1ξρ2 (2q, q goal ) (7)
U att (q) = 2  (q, qgoal ) (7)
2
where ξ is the scale factor and ρ(q, q goal ) denotes the difference between the current position
of the UGV and the end point.
The gravitational potential field that envelops a UGV plays a crucial role in its navi-
gation towards an endpoint, exhibiting a dynamic intensity that is inversely proportional
to the UGV’s proximity to its destination. This field is most potent when the UGV is at its
greatest distance from the endpoint, exerting a strong guiding force that propels the vehicle
forward. As the UGV advances closer to its target, the gravitational potential field begins
to wane, progressively reducing its influence on the vehicle’s trajectory. This diminution
continues until the UGV reaches the endpoint, at which juncture the gravitational potential
field dissipates entirely, signifying the cessation of its navigational pull.
The guidance system for UGV utilizes the negative gradient of the gravitational
potential energy field to navigate. This mathematical calculation is pivotal in ascertaining
both the magnitude and orientation of the gravitational force acting upon the UGV, guiding
it along the most efficient trajectory towards its endpoint. As the vehicle progresses closer
to its destination, the intensity of this gravitational force diminishes. This gradual reduction
in force serves as an indicator of the diminishing need for directional guidance, ensuring
that the UGV’s path to the endpoint becomes increasingly straightforward as it nears its
goal, optimizing the navigation process by aligning with the path of least resistance. Thus,
the gravitational force Fatt can be expressed as:

Fatt (q) = −∇Uatt (q) = −ξρ(q, q goal ) (8)

Electronics 2024, 13, 972 12 of 33

We construct the repulsive potential field function based on the distance between the
UGV and the obstacle, and the direction of the repulsive force vector obtained according to
Equation (8) points to the UGV. The repulsive potential field Urep can be expressed as:
(
1 1 1 2
2 η ( ρ(q,qobs ) − ρ0 ) , i f ρ(q, qobs ) ≤ ρ0
Urep (q) = (9)
0 , i f ρ(q, qobs ) ≥ ρ0

where η is the repulsion factor, ρ(q, qobs ) denotes the distance between the UGV and the
obstacle, and ρ0 denotes the radius of influence of the obstacle.
According to Equation (12), we can conclude the following: As a UGV navigates closer
to an obstacle, it experiences a repulsive force emanating from the obstacle’s repulsive
potential field. This force intensifies the nearer the UGV is to the obstacle, inversely
diminishing as the distance between them increases. In areas devoid of obstacles, the
UGV encounters no such repulsive forces. This interaction underscores the dynamic
relationship between the UGV’s proximity to obstacles and the intensity of the repulsive
force, highlighting a mechanism designed to prevent collisions by naturally guiding the
UGV away from potential impediments in its path.
Similarly, the exact value of the repulsive force Frep is obtained by solving for the nega-
tive gradient of the repulsive potential field Urep , whose repulsive force can be calculated as:

Frep (q) =−∇Urep (q)

 0 , i f ρ(q, qobs ) ≥ ρ0 (10)
= q−qobs
Krep ( ρ(q,q1 − 1 1
ρ0 )( ρ(q,q )2 ) ∥q−qobs ∥ , i f ρ(q, qobs ) < ρ0
obs ) obs

where Krep is the repulsive force scale factor, which acts in the same way as η in the
above equation.
The initial stance of a UGV within the navigational space is marked by a pronounced
potential energy, a direct consequence of its substantial separation from the intended
target. This scenario is further complicated by the presence of obstacles, which introduce
a repulsive potential field around them, incrementally elevating the potential energy
in their immediate surroundings. The UGV’s trajectory is subsequently molded by the
intricate interplay between various potential fields—namely, the gravitational (attractive)
force emanating from the endpoint and the repulsive forces generated by obstacles. The
convergence of these forces creates a composite potential field, acting as a navigational
beacon for the UGV. To achieve successful navigation, the UGV embarks on a journey
from regions characterized by elevated potential energy—its starting position and the
vicinity of obstacles—to zones where the potential energy is markedly lower. This strategic
maneuvering enables the UGV to adeptly sidestep obstacles, thereby mitigating collision
risks and facilitating a smoother progression towards its endpoint. The movement pattern
of the UGV, governed by the gradient of potential energy across the navigational field,
illustrates a purposeful transition from high-energy states to more energetically favorable
locales, encapsulating the vehicle’s adeptness in negotiating complex terrains by leveraging
the differential in potential energy to guide its path towards the destination. The combined
potential field and the combined force are represented as follows:

U = Uatt + Urep (11)

F = Fatt + Frep (12)

4.2.2. Modified Potential Field Function

The Artificial Potential Field (APF) algorithm, celebrated for its high real-time perfor-
mance and path-smoothing properties, is particularly adept at dynamic obstacle avoidance
in localized path planning. It conceptualizes obstacles and targets within the environment
as generating repulsive and attractive forces, respectively, forming a potential field through
 Electronics 2024, 13, 972 13 of 33

which the path is planned. This method enables a dynamic feedback mechanism with the
surrounding environment, showcasing significant adaptability. However, despite these
strengths, the APF algorithm encounters several critical limitations that can severely impact
its effectiveness, particularly when integrated with the A* algorithm for comprehensive
path planning solutions. These limitations primarily include:
1. The local minimum problem—This issue arises when the UGV is influenced by equal
and opposite forces, resulting in a net force of zero and causing the vehicle to become
stuck in a local minimum without reaching the goal. This situation is depicted in
Figure 7a, where the gravitational force towards the goal is counterbalanced by
repulsive forces from nearby obstacles, leading to potential oscillations and stalling in
the path planning process;
2. The target point unreachability problem—As illustrated in Figure 7b, when obstacles
surround the target point, the UGV experiences a reduction in gravitational force as
Electronics 2024, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW it approaches the goal, while facing increasing repulsive forces. This imbalance14 of can
35
prevent the UGV from completing its path to the target, culminating in the failure of
the path planning task.

(a)

(b)
Figure
Figure7.7.Disadvantages
Disadvantagesofofthe
theAPF
APFalgorithm.
algorithm.(a)
(a)The
Thelocal
localminimum
minimumproblem.
problem.(b)
(b)The
Thetarget
targetpoint
point
unreachability
unreachabilityproblem.
problem.

To
Toaddress
addressthe
thechallenges
challengesofoftarget
targetinaccessibility
inaccessibilityandandlocal
localoptimization
optimizationproblems,
problems,
thegravitational
the gravitationalpotential
potential energy
energy field
field function
function hashas
beenbeen improved
improved to ensure
to ensure a morea more
effi-
efficient
cient pathpath for UGV.
for the the UGV.
ThisThis improvement
improvement allows
allows the gravitational
the gravitational forceforce acting
acting on
on the
the UGV to weaken as the distance between the UGV and the endpoint
UGV to weaken as the distance between the UGV and the endpoint expands, and the rate expands, and
ofthe rate of gravitational
gravitational weakeningweakening is proportional
is proportional to thebetween
to the distance distancethe
between
UGV andthe UGV and
the end-
the endpoint.
point. This adjustment
This adjustment ensures
ensures that that the navigation
the navigation mechanism mechanism is more nuanced
is more nuanced and re-
sponsive, resulting in smoother transitions and more accurate target homing. The im-
proved gravitational potential field and gravitational force equation are shown below:

1
 2 K att (q − qgoal )
2
, if  (q, qgoal )  d
U att (q) =  (13)
dK (q − q ) − 1 K d 2 , if  (q, qgoal )  d
 att goal
2
att

 K att (q − qgoal ) , if  (q, qgoal )  d

Electronics 2024, 13, 972 14 of 33

and responsive, resulting in smoother transitions and more accurate target homing. The
improved gravitational potential field and gravitational force equation are shown below:
(
1 2
2 K att ( q − q goal ) , i f ρ(q, q goal ) ≤ d
Uatt (q) = (13)
1 2
dKatt (q − q goal ) − 2 K att d , i f ρ(q, q goal ) > d

Katt (q − q goal ) , i f ρ(q, q goal ) ≤ d
Fatt (q) = −∇Uatt (q) = q −q (14)
−dKatt goal , i f ρ(q, q goal ) > d
∥q−q goal ∥

where Katt is the gravitational scale factor, q is the position of the UGV, q goal is the target
point position, and d is the distance factor.
As a UGV navigates towards its endpoint, encountering an obstacle in close proximity
triggers a notable decrease in gravitational force and a sharp increase in repulsive force. This
significant repulsive force can hinder the UGV from successfully reaching its destination.
To mitigate this issue, the repulsion function has been optimized to ensure that while the
repulsive force still intensifies as the UGV approaches the endpoint, it does so at a more
controlled rate. This crucial adjustment effectively tempers the overwhelming repulsive
force experienced near the endpoint, enabling a more balanced and feasible approach for
the UGV to navigate around obstacles and reach its intended goal. The following is a
detailed description of the repulsive potential field and the associated improvements made
to the repulsive force:
( 1 1 1 2 i
2 η ( ρ(q,qobs ) − ρ0 ) ρ ( q, qobs ) , i f ρ ( q, qobs ) ≤ ρ0
Urep (q) = (15)
0 , i f ρ(q, qobs ) ≥ ρ0

Frep (q) = −∇
 Urep (q)
ρi (q,q )
 a1 η ( ρ(q,q1 ) − ρ1 ) ρ2 (q,qgoal)

 obs 0 obs
(16)

= + a2 i η ( 1
 2 ρ(q,qobs )
− ρ10 )2 ρi−1 (q, q goal ) , i f ρ(q, qobs ) ≤ ρ0


0 , i f ρ(q, qobs ) > ρ0


q − qobs
a1 = ∇ρ(q, qobs ) = (17)
∥q − qobs ∥
q − q goal
a2 = −∇ρ(q, q goal ) = − (18)
∥q − q goal ∥
where i is a positive number, q goal is the position of the target point, and qobs is the position
of the obstacle.
As shown in Figure 8, we evaluated the MAPF algorithm and the traditional APF
algorithm in a comparative study of path planning simulations using a 20 × 20 grid map,
where the blue hexagrams represent the starting node locations, the black grids represent
the obstacles, the red pentagrams represent the end locations, and the red lines represent
the final paths generated by the algorithm. We observed that the traditional APF algorithm
frequently led to oscillation around obstacles and could trap the UGV in a local minimum,
inhibiting its progress towards the intended target, as depicted in Figure 8a. Conversely,
our MAPF algorithm, which features a modified potential field function and a distance
factor, was able to plot a reasonable path within the same simulated environment. We
found that the MAPF algorithm effectively addresses and resolves the issues associated
with target unreachability and local minima that were prevalent in the traditional APF
method. It significantly improves path smoothness and increases the robustness of the
original algorithm, as illustrated in Figure 8b, thereby enabling safer and more effective
UGV path planning.
Electronics 2024,
Electronics 2024,13,
13,972
x FOR PEER REVIEW 16
15 of 35
of 33

(a) (b)
Figure 8.
Figure 8. The
The comparison
comparisonof ofthe
theAPF
APFalgorithms
algorithmswith
withthe
theMAPF
MAPFalgorithms.
algorithms.(a)(a)Before
Before correcting
correcting the
the potential field function. (b) After correcting the potential field function.
potential field function. (b) After correcting the potential field function.

The
The flow
flow chart
chart of
of the
the MAPF
MAPF algorithm
algorithm is
is depicted
depicted in
in Figure
Figure 9.
9. The steps of the MAPF
MAPF
algorithm
algorithm are
are shown
shown below.
below.
1.
1. Initialize the starting parameters of UGV path planning;
2.
2. Calculate the combined force on the UGV by Equations (14) and (16) and determine determine
whether itit falls
falls into
intothe
thelocal
localextreme
extremevalue.
value.If If
not, thethe
not, unmanned
unmannedvehicle moves
vehicle ac-
moves
cording
according to to
thethe
magnitude
magnitudeand
anddirection of of
direction thethe
combined
combined force;
force;
3.
3. The UGV moves to the next position in the direction of the combined force; force;
4.
4. Judge whether the current position is the target position. If yes, the planning task is is
completed. Otherwise,
Otherwise, repeat the above steps.

4.3. Path Optimization

4.3.1. Floyd Algorithm
Floyd’s algorithm, colloquially termed here as the interpolation method, is ingeniously
crafted to ascertain the shortest path connecting any two points within directed graphs [31],
showcasing its robustness by accommodating scenarios where edge weights may assume
negative values. At the heart of this pathfinding algorithm lies the path matrix—a corner-
stone of its theoretical framework. This matrix is pivotal in delineating the algorithm’s
strategic approach to path planning, serving as a comprehensive repository that captures
the lengths of the shortest paths between all pairs of vertices within the graph. The al-
gorithm iteratively updates the path matrix, refining and consolidating the information
on the shortest paths by systematically considering all possible intermediate vertices that
might lie on a path between any two vertices. Through this iterative refinement, the algo-
rithm constructs a detailed matrix representation that encapsulates the optimal distances
between every pair of nodes, effectively leveraging the matrix as a navigational guide to
chart the most efficient course through the graph. The following is the theoretical idea of
interpolation method path planning:
1. Solve a graph by building a weight matrix and updating it recursively from the weight
matrix to the minimum path distance matrix between any two points;
2. Create a path of subsequent nodes (path matrix), counting the minimum distance
between any points;
3. Each value in the weight matrix is updated recursively, and if Equation (19) holds, the
element values in the path matrix are modified, as computed by Equation (20).

l ( x, y) > l ( x, z) + l (z, y) (19)

Electronics 2024, 13, 972 16 of 33

l ( x, y) = l ( x, z) + l (z, y) (20)
Interpolation is a path planning algorithm that solves for the minimum distance
between multiple sources, and it utilizes dynamic programming ideas to solve for the
shortest path in a matrix with positive or negative edge weights. By using the interpolation
method to optimize the path planned performed by the algorithm, it can effectively remove
the points with too many transitions in the path, reduce the redundant transitions, and
eliminate the redundant points in the same straight line, which can help reduce the number
of points stored in the UGV when it is running, and at the same time, its motion path is
effectively smoothed. The schematic diagram of the interpolation method is shown
Electronics 2024, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW
in
17 of 35
Figure 10, where black rectangles indicate obstacles and dashed lines indicate optional
paths for UGV.

Figure9.9.The
Figure Theflow
flowchart
chartof
ofthe
theMAPF
MAPFalgorithm.
algorithm.

Denote
4.3. Path the shortest distance from point x to y by l ( x, y). From the Figure 10, we can
Optimization
infer that when there is an obstacle between x and y that cannot be passed, l ( x, y) = +∞,
4.3.1. Floyd Algorithm
and the path is x → y . Insert points a,b between points x,y:
IfFloyd’s algorithm,
l ( x, a) + l ( a, y) < lcolloquially
( x, y), then ltermed
( x, y) = here
l ( x, aas
) +the
l ( a,interpolation method,
y), and the path is x →isaingen-
→ y.
iously
If l ( x, b) + l (b, y) < l ( x, a) + l ( a, y), then l ( x, y) = l ( x, b) + l (b, y), and the directed
crafted to ascertain the shortest path connecting any two points within path is
xgraphs
→ b →[31], y . showcasing its robustness by accommodating scenarios where edge weights
may assume negative values. At the heart of this pathfinding algorithm lies the path ma-
trix—a cornerstone of its theoretical framework. This matrix is pivotal in delineating the
algorithm’s strategic approach to path planning, serving as a comprehensive repository
that captures the lengths of the shortest paths between all pairs of vertices within the
graph. The algorithm iteratively updates the path matrix, refining and consolidating the
 Interpolation is a path planning algorithm that solves for the minimum distance be-
tween multiple sources, and it utilizes dynamic programming ideas to solve for the short-
est path in a matrix with positive or negative edge weights. By using the interpolation
Electronics 2024, 13, 972
method to optimize the path planned performed by the algorithm, it can effectively re-
17 of 33
move the points with too many transitions in the path, reduce the redundant transitions,
and eliminate the redundant points in the same straight line, which can help reduce the
number of points stored in the UGV when it is running, and at the same time, its motion
The optimal path from x to y is x → b → y . In this paper, the node deletion strategy
path is effectively smoothed. The schematic diagram of the interpolation method is shown
is experimentally verified as shown in Figure 11, where the blue hexagram is the starting
in Figure 10, where black rectangles indicate obstacles and dashed lines indicate optional
node position, the black grid represents the obstacle, the red pentagram represents the end
paths for UGV.
position, and the red line represents the final path generated by the algorithm.

Electronics 2024, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 19 of 35

represents the end position, and the red line represents the final path generated by the
Figure 10. Principle of path optimization by the interpolation method.
algorithm.

Denote the shortest distance from point x to y by l ( x, y) . From the Figure 10,
we can infer that when there is an obstacle between x and y that cannot be passed,
l ( x, y) = + , and the path is x → y . Insert points a , b between points x , y :
If l ( x, a) + l (a, y)  l ( x, y) , then l ( x, y) = l ( x, a) + l (a, y) , and the path is
x →a → y .
If l ( x, b) + l (b, y)  l ( x, a) + l (a, y) , then l ( x, y) = l ( x, b) + l (b, y) , and the
path is x → b → y .
The optimal path from x to y is x → b → y . In this paper, the node deletion
strategy is experimentally verified as shown in Figure 11, where the blue hexagram is the
starting node position, the black grid represents the obstacle, the red pentagram

(a) (b)
Figure 11. Optimized
Figure Optimizedpathpathgiven
givenbyby
interpolation method.
interpolation (a) Traditional
method. A* algorithm
(a) Traditional path. path.
A* algorithm (b)
Optimized
(b) path
Optimized yielded
path by interpolation
yielded method.
by interpolation method.

Table 1 presents
Table presentsaaperformance
performancecomparison
comparison between
betweenan interpolation
an interpolationmethod and the
method and
traditional
the A* A*
traditional algorithm forfor
algorithm pathfinding
pathfinding scenarios,
scenarios,under
under identical obstacle
identical obstacleconditions.
conditions.
Theinterpolation
The interpolation method demonstrates its superiority
superiority by byproducing
producingaapath pathwith
withaashorter
shorter
overall distance. Moreover, it significantly reduces the number of path inflection
overall distance. Moreover, it significantly reduces the number of path inflection points points
and decreases
and decreases thethecumulative
cumulativenumbernumber of of
path turning
path angles,
turning indicating
angles, a more
indicating directdirect
a more and
efficient
and route.
efficient Experimental
route. outcomes
Experimental strongly
outcomes affirm affirm
strongly the interpolation method’s
the interpolation effec-
method’s
tiveness in optimizing
effectiveness pathfinding,
in optimizing showcasing
pathfinding, showcasingits advantages
its advantagesoverover
the conventional A*
the conventional
algorithm
A* algorithmin terms of path
in terms length,
of path smoothness,
length, smoothness, andand
navigational
navigationalefficiency.
efficiency.

Table 1. Comparison of path optimization results using the interpolation method.

Path Length Average Compu- Number of Path Cumulative Turn-

Algorithm
(m) tation Time (s) Turning Points ing Angle (°)
A* 76.72 0.34 22 1260
Optimization
73.43 0.96 12 990
path
Electronics 2024, 13, 972 18 of 33

Table 1. Comparison of path optimization results using the interpolation method.

Electronics 2024, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 20 of 35
Average Computation Number of Path Cumulative Turning
Algorithm Path Length (m)
Time (s) Turning Points Angle (◦ )
A* 76.72 0.34 22 1260
Optimization path
4.3.2. Path Smoothing
73.43 0.96 12 990
The application of the interpolation method in path planning significantly minimizes
the count of path nodes, yet it introduces challenges such as paths characterized by large
4.3.2. Path Smoothing
turns and rough transitions, which detract from the ideal movement patterns for UGVs.
This The application
reduction of the
in nodes interpolation
highlights method need
the ongoing in pathforplanning significantlytominimizes
further refinement achieve
the count of path nodes, yet it introduces challenges such
smoother UGV navigation. To address this, B-Spline curves are recognized as paths characterized by large
for their ca-
turns and rough transitions, which detract from the ideal movement
pacity to smooth out corners while maintaining the general trajectory of the paths. These patterns for UGVs.
This
curvesreduction in nodes
are effectively highlights
employed the
in the ongoing
study need for
to enhance pathfurther refinement
smoothness, to achieve
offering a tai-
smoother
lored UGV
solution navigation.
that bridges the Togapaddress
betweenthis,
nodeB-Spline
reductioncurves
and theare recognizedforfor
requirement their
fluid,
capacity to smooth out corners while maintaining the general trajectory
efficient UGV movement [32]. In this paper, three B-spline curves are used for path of the paths. These
curves are effectively employed in the study to enhance path smoothness, offering a tailored
smoothing.
solution
Thethat bridges
B-spline theis
curve gap between
defined as: node reduction and the requirement for fluid, efficient
UGV movement [32]. In this paper, three B-spline curves are used for path smoothing.
n
The B-spline curve is defined as:
P(t ) = PF i i , n (t )
t = 0n
, t ∈ [0,1] (21)

P(t) = ∑ Pi Fi,n (t) , t ∈ [0, 1] (21)

t=0 for the i -th control point,
In Equation (21), Pi is the equation Fi ,n (t ) is the basis
function of the n -th degree B-spline, and the formula for the n -th degree B-spline curve
In Equation (21), Pi is the equation for the i-th control point, Fi,n (t) is the basis function
is:
of the n-th degree B-spline, and the formula for the n-th degree B-spline curve is:
1 n −i
Fi , n (t ) = 1 n− j j
i ( −1) Cn +1 (t + n − i − j ) (22)
Fi,n (t) = n !∑j = 0(−1) j Cn+1 (t + n − i − j)
j
(22)
n! j=0

(n + 1)!
Cj nj+1 =
Cn+
= ( n + 1)! (23)
(23)
1 (nn++ 11 −
j!j !( − jj))!!
Figure 12
12 showcases
showcasesthe theapplication
applicationofofaaB-spline
B-splinecurve
curvefor
forpath
pathsmoothing,
smoothing, with
with key
key
highlighted for
features highlighted for clarity.
clarity. A
Ablue
bluehexagram
hexagrammarks
marksthethestarting
startingnode,
node,while
while obstacles
obstacles
represented by
are represented by aa black
black grid.
grid. The
Thejourney’s
journey’sendendisisdenoted
denotedby bya ared
redpentagram,
pentagram,withwith
algorithm’s final
the algorithm’s final path
pathtraced
tracedbybyaared
redline,
line,illustrating
illustratingaasmooth
smoothtrajectory
trajectoryfrom
fromstart
start
to finish.

(a) (b)
Figure 12. The smooth path of
of the
the A*
A* algorithm.
algorithm. (a)
(a) Before
Beforepath
pathsmoothing.
smoothing.(b)
(b)After
Afterpath
pathsmoothing.
smooth-
ing.
Electronics 2024, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 21 of 35

Electronics 2024, 13, 972 19 of 33

As shown in Table 2, the optimization of the path using three B-spline curves reduces
the path length, and the path is smoother in cases with the same obstacle. The experi-
As shown
mental results in Table
verify 2, effectiveness
the the optimization of path
of the the path using three
smoothing B-spline curves reduces
method.
the path length, and the path is smoother in cases with the same obstacle. The experimental
results
Table 2.verify the effectiveness
Comparison of the path
of path optimization smoothing
results method.
after path smoothing.

Table 2. Comparison of pathPath

optimization Average Com- Cumulative
Length results after path smoothing.
Number of Path
Algorithm putation Time Turning Angle
(m) Turning Points
Average Computation Number
(s) of Path Cumulative Turning
(°)
Algorithm Path Length (m) ◦)
A* before path Time (s) Turning Points Angle (
73.43 0.96 12 990
A* before path smoothing
73.43 0.96 12 990
smoothing A* after path smooth-
A* after path 69.59 0.98 0 0
69.59 ing 0.98 0 0
smoothing

4.4. BA*-MAPF Algorithm

4.4. BA*-MAPF Algorithm
To enhance the traditional A* algorithm, which is slow and searches excessively, a
To enhance
bidirectional the traditional
search A* algorithm,
strategy is introduced. which
This is slow
approach and searches
dynamically setsexcessively, a
target points
bidirectional search strategy is introduced. This approach dynamically
in both forward and reverse searches, significantly boosting efficiency. On another front, sets target points
in both forward and reverse searches, significantly boosting efficiency. On another front,
the APF algorithm is refined to address its propensity for local optimums and difficulty
the APF algorithm is refined to address its propensity for local optimums and difficulty
encountered in endpoint approach due to excessive repulsive forces. Adjustments include
encountered in endpoint approach due to excessive repulsive forces. Adjustments include
modifying the gravitational potential energy field function with a distance factor and re-
modifying the gravitational potential energy field function with a distance factor and
fining the repulsive force field function for better obstacle management. In comparing
refining the repulsive force field function for better obstacle management. In comparing
global versus local path planning, the A* algorithm shines in global path planning but
global versus local path planning, the A* algorithm shines in global path planning but
struggles with dynamic obstacles, while the APF algorithm is adept at local path planning
struggles with dynamic obstacles, while the APF algorithm is adept at local path planning
and navigating around moving obstacles, albeit sometimes taking longer routes. To ad-
and navigating around moving obstacles, albeit sometimes taking longer routes. To address
dress the problem of difficult obstacle avoidance for UGVs in complex dynamic environ-
the problem of difficult obstacle avoidance for UGVs in complex dynamic environments,
ments, we propose the BA*-MAPF algorithm, which not only guarantees to find the glob-
we propose the BA*-MAPF algorithm, which not only guarantees to find the globally
ally optimal
optimal path,path, but also
but also effectively
effectively handles
handles thethe case
case of of dynamic
dynamic obstacles.InInthe
obstacles. theprocess
process
of combining the A* algorithm and the APF algorithm, the following
of combining the A* algorithm and the APF algorithm, the following two issues need to two issues need to
be considered: Firstly, we should consider using the A* algorithm for the
be considered: Firstly, we should consider using the A* algorithm for the initial bootstrap initial bootstrap
planningwhen
planning whenthe theUGV
UGVhas hasnot
not entered
entered the
the radius
radius of
of action
action of
of the
the obstacle,
obstacle, andand secondly,
secondly,
onthe
on thebasis
basisofofthis
thispath,
path,wewe should
should determine
determine whether
whether there
there are are
anyany reserved
reserved nodesnodes of
of the
the A* algorithm in the area of action of the obstacle, and continue to carry
A* algorithm in the area of action of the obstacle, and continue to carry out the deletion if out the deletion
if there
there areare any.
any. TheThe model
model of the
of the BA*-APF
BA*-APF algorithm
algorithm is shown
is shown in Figure
in Figure 13: 13:

Figure13.
Figure 13.Model
Modeldiagram
diagramof
ofBA*-APF
BA*-APFalgorithm.
algorithm.
 As shown in Figure 13, ( q1 , , qi ) is the path node of the A* algorithm and r
is the radius of obstacle action, where q1 , q3 , q4 , q5 and q7 are the reserved nodes
Electronics 2024, 13, 972 for improving A* algorithm. 20 of 33

Assuming that the UGV at time t is located at point q1 , when the UGV advances to
q3 , As
it enters
showninto the range
in Figure 13, (q1of
, · ·action
· · · · , qiof
) isthe
theAPF
path algorithm.
node of the A*At algorithm
this time,and
since
r ispoints
the q4
and qof
radius obstacle action, where q1 , q3 , q4 , q5 and q7 are the reserved nodes for improving
5 are in the range of action of the potential field, they are discarded, and the next
A* algorithm.
q7 is set
nodeAssuming as the
that theUGV
target
at point.
time t is The flowat
located chat of qthe
point BA*-MAPF algorithm is shown in
1 , when the UGV advances to q3 ,
itFigure into the range of action of the APF algorithm. At this time, since points q4 and q5
enters13.
are inFirst,
the range of action
the BA* of the potential
algorithm searchesfield, they are
for paths in discarded,
the globaland the next node
environment andq7plans
is the
set as the target point. The flow chat of the BA*-MAPF algorithm is shown
overall path using the acquired environmental information. In the initial stage, the UGV in Figure 13.
First, the BA* algorithm searches for paths in the global environment and plans the
follows the global path planned by the BA* algorithm. At the same time, the UGV detects
overall path using the acquired environmental information. In the initial stage, the UGV
the surrounding environment in real time using its own configured sensing devices. If a
follows the global path planned by the BA* algorithm. At the same time, the UGV detects
dynamic obstacle
the surrounding is found within
environment the detection
in real time range,
using its own and when
configured the retained
sensing nodes
devices. If a are
within the range of the dynamic obstacle, the path nodes that are
dynamic obstacle is found within the detection range, and when the retained nodes are within the range of the
obstacle
within theare considered
range for deletion,
of the dynamic obstacle, and
thethen
pathobstacle
nodes that avoidance
are withinisthe carried
rangeout using the
of the
obstacle are considered for deletion, and then obstacle avoidance is carried out using thethe end
MAPF algorithm, which models the obstacle as a repulsive potential field, and
MAPF
point asalgorithm, which models
a gravitational potentialthefield.
obstacle
Underas athe
repulsive
action ofpotential field, and
the artificial the end
potential field, the
point
UGV as a gravitational
will search for the potential
path to field.
the Under the action
end point. Whenofthethe UGV
artificial potential
leaves field, of the
the range
the UGV will
obstacle and search
reachesforthe
thenext
pathtarget
to the node,
end point. When the UGV
the algorithm returnsleaves theBA*
to the range of the and
algorithm
obstacle
finally finds the path with the lowest cost. The flow of the BA*-MAPF algorithmand
and reaches the next target node, the algorithm returns to the BA* algorithm is shown
finally finds the path with the lowest cost. The flow of the BA*-MAPF algorithm is shown
in Figure 14.
in Figure 14.

Figure 14. The flow chart of the BA*-MAPF algorithm.

Electronics 2024, 13, 972 21 of 33

The pseudocode for the BA*-MAPF Algorithm (Algorithm 1) is as follows.

Algorithm 1 BA*-MAPF algorithm

Input: EnvironmentMap, StartPoint, TargetPoint, DynamicObstacles
Output: Path
Process:
1. Initialize EnvironmentMap, StartPoint, TargetPoint, OpenListForward, OpenListBackward,
ClosedListForward, ClosedListBackward
2. Initialize Path as an empty list, DynamicObstacles with properties
3. Path <- AStar (StartPoint, TargetPoint, OpenListForward, ClosedListForward)
4. ReversePath <- AStar (TargetPoint, StartPoint, OpenListBackward, ClosedListBackward)
5. While Path is not complete:
6. CurrentPosition <- Current position of UGV on Path
7. If UGV encounters DynamicObstacles:
8. ObstacleInfo <- Get information of the encountered DynamicObstacle
9. LocalPath <- APF (CurrentPosition, ObstacleInfo, TargetPoint)
10. Path.Integrate (LocalPath)
11. Else:
12. UGV moves to next position in Path
13. If UGV’s CurrentPosition reaches TargetPoint:
14. Output “Path planning completed” and break loop
15. If Path is blocked:
16. Path <- Replan AStar (CurrentPosition, TargetPoint, OpenListForward,
ClosedListForward)
17. Return Path

5. Simulation Experiments and Analysis

In our simulation experiments, we evaluated various algorithms—GA, PSO, GWO,
A*, APF, and our newly proposed BA*-MAPF—for use in the static path planning of a UGV.
Our initialization of the GA algorithm involved random seeds, roulette wheel selection,
and single-point crossover, with the specific parameter settings detailed in Table 3 [33]. The
PSO algorithm’s optimization process includes adjustments in inertia weights, individual
learning factors, and social learning factors, with these parameters elaborated in Table 4 [34].
Inspired by the social structure of grey wolves, our GWO algorithm seeks global optima
under the guidance of α, β, and δ wolves, as outlined in Table 5 [35]. Additionally, the
APF algorithm we implemented calculates gravitational and repulsive forces to ascertain
the UGV’s path, with its parameters enumerated in Table 6 [36]. Then, dynamic path
planning for UGVs is performed using the APF algorithm and the BA*-MAPF algorithm,
and experimental comparisons are made. Finally, the proposed BA*-MAPF algorithm is
simulated in urban and 3D environments. The experimental system is configured with
Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-7400U CPU@ 2.30 GHz 2.40 GHz, and the experimental environment
is Matlab R2019a.

Table 3. The parameter settings of genetic algorithm (GA).

Parameter Value
Population size 100
Number of generations 50
Crossover probability 0.85
Mutation probability 0.1
Electronics 2024, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 24 of 35

Electronics 2024, 13, 972 22 of 33

Table 4. The parameter settings of the particle swarm optimization algorithm (PSO).
Table 4. The parameter settings of the particle swarm optimization algorithmValue
Parameter (PSO).
Population
Parameter size Value 100
Number of generations 50
Population size 100
Inertia
Number weight
of generations 50 0.85
Cognitive coefficient
Inertia weight 0.85 1
Cognitive
Social coefficient
coefficient 1 1
Social coefficient 1
Table 5. The parameter settings of the grey wolf optimizer algorithm (GWO).
Table 5. The parameter settings of the grey wolf optimizer algorithm (GWO).
Parameter Value
Parameter size
Population Value 100
Number of generations
Population size 100 50
αNumber of generations
wolf coefficient 50 0.5
wolfinfluence
βαwolf coefficient 0.5 0.3
β wolf influence 0.3
δ δwolf
wolfinfluence
influence 0.1 0.1
Inertia
Inertiaweight
weight 0.9 0.9

Table 6. The parameter settings of the artificial potential field algorithm (APF).
Table 6. The parameter settings of the artificial potential field algorithm (APF).
Parameter Value
Parameter Value
Number of generations 50
Number of generations 50
Attraction coefficient
Attraction coefficient 50
50
Repulsion coefficient
Repulsion coefficient 0.5 0.5
Influence
Influence distance
distance 0.3 0.3
Stepsize
Step size 0.9 0.9

5.1. Path Planning in Static Obstacle Environments

We conducted simulation experiments for the BA*-MAPF algorithm algorithm and
and other
other com-
com-
parative algorithms, performing 20 trials across three distinct
distinct experimental
experimental scenarios to
ensure the accuracy of our our results.
results. These
These experimental
experimental environments were meticulously
designed using the raster map method outlined in Section 3. We created three different different
20××2020environment
scenarios in aa 20 environment with a blue hexagram marking the starting
with a blue hexagram marking the starting point, point, a
a red
red pentagram marking the end point, a red line representing the final path
pentagram marking the end point, a red line representing the final path generated by the generated
by the algorithm,
algorithm, and various
and various shapes shapes of obstacles,
of obstacles, as shownasin
shown
Figurein15.
Figure
This 15. This approach
approach allowed
allowed us to comprehensively evaluate the performance and reliability
us to comprehensively evaluate the performance and reliability of our BA*-MAPF of our BA*-MAPF
algo-
algorithm against
rithm against otherother algorithms
algorithms under
under controlled,
controlled, yet varied,
yet varied, conditions.
conditions.

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 15. Experimental scenario. (a) Z-type obstacle. (b) E-type obstacle. (c) Comprehensive obstacle.
Electronics 2024, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 25 of 35

Electronics 2024, 13, 972 Figure 15. Experimental scenario. (a) Z-type obstacle. (b) E-type obstacle. (c) Comprehensive23
obsta-
of 33
cle.

We used the GA algorithm, PSO algorithm, GWO algorithm, APF algorithm, A* al-
We used the GA algorithm, PSO algorithm, GWO algorithm, APF algorithm, A* al-
gorithm and BA*-MAPF algorithm for the simulation experiments of UGV path planning.
gorithm and BA*-MAPF algorithm for the simulation experiments of UGV path planning.
Figure 16 demonstrates the simulation results in the Z-obstacle environment, while Figure
Figure 16 demonstrates the simulation results in the Z-obstacle environment, while Figure 17
17 presents the results of the simulation experiments in the E-obstacle environment, and
presents the results of the simulation experiments in the E-obstacle environment, and finally,
finally, Figure 18 shows the results of the simulation experiments in the combined obstacle
Figure 18 shows the results of the simulation experiments in the combined obstacle environment.
environment.

(a) (b) (c)

(d) (e) (f)

Figure 16.
Figure 16. The
Thepath
pathplanning
planningresults
resultsofofdifferent algorithms
different onon
algorithms a Z-type obstacle
a Z-type map.
obstacle (a) GA.
map. (b)
(a) GA.
PSO. (c) GWO. (d) APF. (e) A*. (f) BA*-MAPF.
(b) PSO. (c) GWO. (d) APF. (e) A*. (f) BA*-MAPF.

The simulation
simulation results
resultsininthe
theZ-obstacle
Z-obstaclescenario
scenarioareare shown
shown in Figure
in Figure 16. 16.
BasedBased on
on the
the path planning results, the simulation experiments of the GA algorithm,
path planning results, the simulation experiments of the GA algorithm, PSO algorithm, PSO algo-
rithm, algorithm,
GWO GWO algorithm, A* algorithm,
A* algorithm, and BA*-MAPF
and BA*-MAPF algorithmalgorithm
plan theplan
pathsthefrom
pathsthefrom
startthe
to
startend.
the to the end. Among
Among these,
these, the the GA algorithm
GA algorithm and PSOand PSO algorithm
algorithm planroutes,
plan intricate intricate routes,
while the
while
GA the GA algorithm,
algorithm, PSO algorithm,PSO GWO
algorithm, GWOand
algorithm algorithm and A*plan
A* algorithm algorithm plan more
more complicated
complicated
and and twisted
twisted routes, and the routes, and the
simulation simulationofexperiments
experiments of the APF
the APF algorithm do notalgorithm
plan routes.do
not planthem,
Among routes. Among
the them, the
A* algorithm A*a algorithm
has considerablyhas reduced
a considerably reduced
path length, path length,
planning time,
number
planningoftime,
turning points
number of and cumulative
turning points andturning angle compared
cumulative turning angleto the GA algorithm,
compared to the
PSO algorithm PSO
GA algorithm, and GWO algorithm.
algorithm and GWOAndalgorithm.
the simulation
And experiments
the simulation of the BA*-MAPF
experiments of
algorithm
the BA*-MAPF plan algorithm
shorter pathplandistances and distances
shorter path smoother andpaths than thepaths
smoother A* algorithm.
than the A*The al-
specific
gorithm.experimental results are shown
The specific experimental in Table
results 7.
are shown in Table 7.
 PSO 83.1 10.40 21 1262 NO
GWO 84.5 10.04 23 1390 NO
Z-type obstacle
APF / / / / YES
A* 76.7 0.03 22 1260 NO
BA*-MAPF
Electronics 2024, 13, 972 69.6 0.39 0 0 YES24 of 33

(a) (b) (c)

(d) (e) (f)

Figure 17.
Figure 17. The
Thepath
pathplanning
planningresults
resultsofofdifferent
differentalgorithms onon
algorithms anan
E-type obstacle
E-type map.
obstacle (a) GA.
map. (b)
(a) GA.
PSO. (c) GWO. (d) APF. (e) A*. (f) BA*-MAPF.
(b) PSO. (c) GWO. (d) APF. (e) A*. (f) BA*-MAPF.

We meticulously documented the simulation outcomes for the E-type obstacle sce-
Table 7. Comparison of the results of the six algorithms with a Z-type obstacle.
nario in Figure 17, where algorithms like GA, PSO, GWO, APF, A* and BA*-MAPF were
tested for their ability to navigate
Average from start to finish. While each algorithm succeeded in
Experimental Number of Path Cumulative
Algorithmplanning
PathaLength
route,(m)
paths Computation
generated by some, notably Smoothness
Scenario Turning Points the Turning
GA algorithm,
Angle (◦ ) exhibited signifi-
Time (s)
cant complexity, and the APF algorithm encountered a local optimum that resulted in a
GA dead-end. 109.9
In comparison, the10.67A* algorithm demonstrated
29 2048
superior efficiency,NOyielding
PSO 83.1 10.40 21 1262 NO
GWO shorter path lengths, reduced
84.5 planning times, 23
10.04 fewer turning points,
1390 and lower cumulative
NO
Z-type obstacle
APF turning angles / than GA, PSO,/ and GWO. Remarkably,
/ our BA*-MAPF
/ algorithm
YESoutper-
A*
formed the76.7
A* algorithm by 0.03 22
producing even shorter 1260
and smoother paths, a fact NO
substanti-
BA*-MAPF 69.6 0.39 0 0 YES
ated by the detailed comparative analysis in Table 8.

We meticulously documented the simulation outcomes for the E-type obstacle scenario
in Figure 17, where algorithms like GA, PSO, GWO, APF, A* and BA*-MAPF were tested for
their ability to navigate from start to finish. While each algorithm succeeded in planning a
route, paths generated by some, notably the GA algorithm, exhibited significant complexity,
and the APF algorithm encountered a local optimum that resulted in a dead-end. In
comparison, the A* algorithm demonstrated superior efficiency, yielding shorter path
lengths, reduced planning times, fewer turning points, and lower cumulative turning
angles than GA, PSO, and GWO. Remarkably, our BA*-MAPF algorithm outperformed the
A* algorithm by producing even shorter and smoother paths, a fact substantiated by the
detailed comparative analysis in Table 8.
 PSO 40.1 10.41 7 430 NO
GWO 39.6 10.46 7 461 NO
E-type obstacle
APF / / / / YES
A* 36.5 0.02 5 270 NO
BA*-MAPF
Electronics 2024, 13, 972 34.0 0.42 0 0 YES25 of 33

(a) (b) (c)

(d) (e) (f)

Figure 18.
Figure 18. The
Thepath
pathplanning
planningresults
results
ofof different
different algorithms
algorithms on on a comprehensive
a comprehensive obstacle
obstacle map.map. (a)
(a) GA.
GA. (b) PSO. (c) GWO. (d) APF. (e) A*. (f) BA*-MAPF.
(b) PSO. (c) GWO. (d) APF. (e) A*. (f) BA*-MAPF.

We detail the simulation outcomes for the integrated obstacle scenario in Figure 18,
Table 8. Comparison of the results of the six algorithms for an E-type obstacle.
examining the performances of GA, PSO, GWO, APF, A*, and BA*-MAPF algorithms in
path planning from start to finish across winding routes. The path plotted by the GA al-
Average
Experimental Number of Path Cumulative
Algorithmgorithm emerged as particularly intricate. However,
Points theTurning
paths Angle
generated bySmoothness
the A* algo-
Path Length (m) Computation
Scenario Turning (◦ )
Time (s)
rithm showcase clear superiority in terms of path length, planning time, number of turn-
GA ing points, 63.4
and cumulative10.55 16
turning angles compared 1310
to those NO GWO.
by GA, PSO, and
PSO 40.1 10.41 7 430 NO
GWO Notably, our 39.6BA*-MAPF algorithm
10.46 excelled 7further, crafting461 paths that wereNO not only
E-type obstacle
APF shorter but also
/ smoother than those produced by the A* algorithm, a superiority com-
/ / / YES
A* prehensively36.5documented in 0.02 5
Table 9. This underscores 270
our BA*-MAPF NO
algorithm’s en-
BA*-MAPF 34.0 0.42 0 0 YES
hanced efficiency and effectiveness in navigating complex environments.

We detail the simulation outcomes for the integrated obstacle scenario in Figure 18,
examining the performances of GA, PSO, GWO, APF, A*, and BA*-MAPF algorithms in
path planning from start to finish across winding routes. The path plotted by the GA
algorithm emerged as particularly intricate. However, the paths generated by the A*
algorithm showcase clear superiority in terms of path length, planning time, number
of turning points, and cumulative turning angles compared to those by GA, PSO, and
GWO. Notably, our BA*-MAPF algorithm excelled further, crafting paths that were not
only shorter but also smoother than those produced by the A* algorithm, a superiority
comprehensively documented in Table 9. This underscores our BA*-MAPF algorithm’s
enhanced efficiency and effectiveness in navigating complex environments.
4, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 28 of 35

Electronics 2024, 13, 972 26 of 33

Table 9. Comparison of the results of the six algorithms for comprehensive obstacle.

ntal Average Compu- Number of Path Cumulative

Smoothness
Algorithm Path Length (m) Table 9. Comparison of the results of the six algorithms for comprehensive obstacle.
o tation Time (s) Turning Points Turning Angle (°)
GA 54.9 9.37 22
Average 1631 NO
Experimental Number of Path Cumulative
PSOScenario 38.7 Algorithm Path Length (m)
9.58 Computation
11
Time (s)
657
Turning Points NO
Turning Angle (◦ )
Smoothness

en- GWO 39.5 GA 9.67 54.9 11

9.37 22
700 1631
NO NO
cle APF / PSO / 38.7 /
9.58 11 / 657 YES NO
Comprehensive
A* obstacle
32.7 GWOAPF
0.02 39.5
/
9.67
8/ 11
/
405 700
/
NO NO
YES
BA*-MAPF 30.7 A* 0.41 32.7 0
0.02 8 0 405 YES NO
BA*-MAPF 30.7 0.41 0 0 YES

5.2. Algorithm Performance Comparison

5.2. Algorithm Performance Comparison
We compared and analyzed experimental results across various scenarios, meticu-
We compared and analyzed experimental results across various scenarios, meticu-
lously documenting our findings. The average path length is depicted in Figure 19a,
lously documenting our findings. The average path length is depicted in Figure 19a,
providing a clear visual representation of the efficiency of different path planning algo-
providing a clear visual representation of the efficiency of different path planning algo-
rithms. Similarly,rithms.
averageSimilarly,
computation time,
average a critical factor
computation time,ina evaluating
critical factoralgorithm per- algorithm
in evaluating
formance, is illustrated in Figure 19b. We also quantified the navigational complexity
performance, is illustrated in Figure 19b. We also quantified the navigational complexity
through the average number
through of inflection
the average number points, as shown
of inflection in Figure
points, as shown19c,inand the19c,
Figure average
and the average
cumulative number of turning
cumulative angles,
number presented
of turning in Figure
angles, 19d.inThese
presented Figurefigures collectively
19d. These figures collectively
offer a comprehensive
offer aoverview of ouroverview
comprehensive comparative
of ouranalysis, highlighting
comparative the distinctions
analysis, highlighting the distinctions
and efficiencies ofand efficiencies
each algorithm of under
each algorithm under consideration.
consideration.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Figure 19. Comparative
Figureanalysis of experimental
19. Comparative results.
analysis (a) Average
of experimental path length.
results. (b) Average
(a) Average com- (b) Average
path length.
putation time. (c) Average number of path turning points. (d) Average cumulative turning angle.
computation time. (c) Average number of path turning points. (d) Average cumulative turning angle.

In our analysis presented through histogram (a) in Figure 19, we observed that the
BA*-APF algorithm consistently achieved shorter average path lengths compared to the
GA, PSO, GWO, APF, and A* algorithms across three distinct simulation scenarios.
Electronics 2024, 13, 972 27 of 33

In our analysis presented through histogram (a) in Figure 19, we observed that the
BA*-APF algorithm consistently achieved shorter average path lengths compared to the GA,
PSO, GWO, APF, and A* algorithms across three distinct simulation scenarios. Furthermore,
histogram (b) highlights that, within all experimental setups, the path planning time for
the BA*-APF algorithm was slightly longer than that of the A* algorithm, yet significantly
shorter than those recorded for the GA, PSO, and GWO algorithms. This demonstrates
the BA*-APF algorithm’s superior problem-solving efficiency, indicating its effectiveness
in optimizing path planning outcomes while maintaining a balance between speed and
path optimization. Histogram (c)(d) shows that after path smoothing, the overall path
of the BA*-APF algorithm no longer has inflection points and has a lower number of
turning angles, which greatly improves the motion efficiency of the UGV traveling at a
uniform speed and reduces energy consumption, meaning such a path is more suitable for
UGV travel.
To further compare the performance of the BA*-MAPF algorithm with those of the
GA, PSO, GWO, APF, and A* algorithms, we also performed hypothesis tests as shown
in Tables 10–12. The hypothesis test is a t-test and the null hypothesis is defined as H0:
The other algorithms are statistically superior to the BA*-MAPF algorithm. We chose
the significance level α = 0.05, and the degree of freedom was 19. If t is greater than
1.729, the null hypothesis H0 can be rejected, which means that the BA*-MAPF algorithm
performs statistically better than the other algorithms. The BA*-MAPF algorithm and the
A* algorithm plan the same path in each iteration, which means that the path length, the
number of path turning points, and the number of turn-cum-turn angles do not fluctuate
between the BA*-MAPF algorithm and the A* algorithm. Therefore, there is no need for
hypothesis testing on the path length, the number of path turning points or the number of
cumulative turning angles between the BA*-MAPF algorithm and the A* algorithm. Also,
the APF algorithm cannot reach the end point in any of the three scenarios, so there is no
need for hypothesis testing either. From Tables 10–12, we can see that the path length of
the BA*-MAPF algorithm is the shortest among the above algorithms, and the number of
path turning points and the number of turn-cum-turn angles of the BA*-MAPF algorithm
are also the smallest among the above algorithms.

Table 10. Results of hypothesis t-test for algorithmic path length.

Experimental Scenario H0 Test Statistic Conclusion

H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µGA t = 41.05
performs better than GA)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
Z-type obstacle µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µ PSO t = 16.57
performs better than PSO)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µGWO t = 12.76
performs better than GWO)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µGA t = 23.55
performs better than GA)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
E-type obstacle µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µ PSO t = 3.31
performs better than PSO)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µGWO t = 3.84
performs better than GWO)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µGA t = 18.55
performs better than GA)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
Comprehensive obstacle µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µ PSO t = 7.55
performs better than PSO)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µGWO t = 9.58
performs better than GWO)
Electronics 2024, 13, 972 28 of 33

Table 11. Results of hypothesis t-test on the number of turning points of algorithmic paths.

Experimental Scenario H0 Test Statistic Conclusion

H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µGA t = 35.19
performs better than GA)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
Z-type obstacle µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µ PSO t = 46.63
performs better than PSO)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µGWO t = 37.8
performs better than GWO)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µGA t = 23.39
performs better than GA)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
E-type obstacle µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µ PSO t = 7.91
performs better than PSO)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µGWO t = 9.85
performs better than GWO)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µGA t = 31.32
performs better than GA)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
Comprehensive obstacle µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µ PSO t = 14.73
performs better than PSO)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µGWO t = 16.23
performs better than GWO)

Table 12. Results of the hypothesis t-test for the cumulative number of revolutions of the algorithm.

Experimental Scenario H0 Test Statistic Conclusion

H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µGA t = 38.93
performs better than GA)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
Z-type obstacle µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µ PSO t = 41.34
performs better than PSO)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µGWO t = 27.85
performs better than GWO)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µGA t = 25.48
performs better than GA)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
E-type obstacle µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µ PSO t = 5.87
performs better than PSO)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µGWO t = 7.38
performs better than GWO)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µGA t = 40.16
performs better than GA)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
Comprehensive obstacle µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µ PSO t = 11.79
performs better than PSO)
H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF
µ BA∗− MAPF ≥ µGWO t = 12.32
performs better than GWO)

5.3. Multi-Dynamic Obstacle Simulation

We used the APF algorithm and BA*-MAPF algorithm to conduct dynamic obstacle
avoidance path planning simulation experiments for UGV. Where the environment size is
20 × 20, the starting point (blue hexagram) and the end point (red pentagram) are set up,
the blue squares are dynamic obstacles, the black squares are static obstacles and the red
line represents the final path generated by the algorithm. The simulation results of path
planning with a combination of dynamic and static obstacles are shown in Figure 20.
According to the experimental results of path planning for dynamic obstacles, both
the APF algorithm and the BA*-MAPF algorithm successfully planned paths for the UGV
from the starting point to the end point. However, during the path planning process, the
UGV under the APF algorithm will collide with obstacles, and the obstacle avoidance
effect is relatively poor, while the UGV using the BA*-MAPF algorithm successfully avoids
every moving obstacle, and the obstacle avoidance effect is significantly improved. The
 Comprehensive
μ BA*− MAPF ≥ μ PSO t = 11.79 H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF performs better than PSO)
obstacle
μ BA*− MAPF ≥ μGWO t = 12.32 H0: rejected (BA*-MAPF performs better than GWO)

Electronics 2024, 13, 972

5.3. Multi-Dynamic Obstacle Simulation
29 of 33
We used the APF algorithm and BA*-MAPF algorithm to conduct dynamic obstacle
avoidance path planning simulation experiments for UGV. Where the environment size is
20 × 20, the starting point (blue hexagram) and the end point (red pentagram) are set up,
comparison results
the blue squares of theseobstacles,
are dynamic experimental scenarios
the black squares fully demonstrate
are static thethe
obstacles and superiority
red of
the BA*-MAPF algorithm, proving its robustness in facing dynamic situations.
line represents the final path generated by the algorithm. The simulation results of path Detailed
comparisons
planning with of the experimental
a combination dataand
of dynamic canstatic
be found in Table
obstacles 13. in Figure 20.
are shown

Electronics 2024, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 31 of 35

According to the experimental results of path planning for dynamic obstacles, both
the APF algorithm and (a) the BA*-MAPF algorithm successfully planned paths (b)for the UGV
from the starting point to the end point. However, during the path planning process, the
Figure 20.
Figure 20.Path
Pathplanning
planning with
withdynamic
dynamicobstacles. (a) APF.
obstacles. (b)
(a) and
APF.BA*-MAPF.
(b) BA*-MAPF.
UGV under the APF algorithm will collide with obstacles, the obstacle avoidance ef-
fect is relatively poor, while the UGV using the BA*-MAPF algorithm successfully avoids
every 13.
Table moving obstacle, and
Comparison theresults
of the obstacleofavoidance effect is significantly improved. The
the two algorithms.
comparison results of these experimental scenarios fully demonstrate the superiority of
the BA*-MAPF algorithm, proving its robustness in facing dynamic situations. Detailed
Experimental Scenario Algorithm Path Length (m) Average Computation Time (s)
comparisons of the experimental data can be found in Table 13.
APF UGV collision 26.86
Dynamic and static obstacle mapTable 13. Comparison of the results of the two algorithms.
BA*-MAPF 32.88 30.95
Path Length
Average Computation
Experimental Scenario Algorithm
(m) Time (s)
5.4. Dynamic Obstacle Avoidance in Urban Environments
Dynamic and static obstacle APF UGV collision 26.86
UGV are mapnot only required to avoid static
BA*-MAPF 32.88 and dynamic obstacles
30.95 while traveling,
but also to validate their simulation in complex urban environments. In order to verify
5.4. Dynamic
that Obstacle Avoidance
the BA*-MAPF in Urban
algorithm canEnvironments
avoid static and dynamic obstacles and plan optimal
UGV are not only required
routes in urban environments, we to avoid static and dynamic
conducted obstacles whileon
experiments traveling,
grid mapsbut obtained from
also to validate their simulation in complex urban environments. In order to verify that
the real-world benchmark proposed by N. Sturtevant [37]. In this part of the experiment,
the BA*-MAPF algorithm can avoid static and dynamic obstacles and plan optimal routes
we usedenvironments,
in urban a localized we London
conductedcityexperiments
map for on thegrid
simulation, where
maps obtained from the environment size is
the real-
50 × 50,
world the starting
benchmark proposedpoint
by N.isSturtevant
a blue hexagram, theofgoal
[37]. In this part point is a we
the experiment, redused
pentagram, the red
a localized
line Londonthe
represents city final
map for the simulation,
path generated where the environment
by the algorithm sizeandis dynamic
50 × 50, the obstacles (green
starting point
squares) andisstatic
a blue hexagram,
obstaclesthe goal point
(black is a red
squares) pentagram,
are the red
set up. The line representsresults are shown
experimental
the final path generated by the algorithm and dynamic obstacles (green squares) and static
in Figure 21.
obstacles (black squares) are set up. The experimental results are shown in Figure 21.

(a) (b)

Figure 21. Cont.

Electronics 2024, 13, 972 30 of 33
Electronics 2024, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 32 of 35

(c) (d)

(e) (f)
Figure 21. Path planning in urban environments. (a) t = 29 s. (b) t = 33.78 s. (c) t = 51.19 s. (d) t = 59.07
Figure 21. Path planning in urban environments. (a) t = 29 s. (b) t = 33.78 s. (c) t = 51.19 s.
s. (e) t = 85.22 s. (f) t = 109.02 s.
(d) t = 59.07 s. (e) t = 85.22 s. (f) t = 109.02 s.
From the path planning results in Figure 21, it can be seen that the UGV successfully
Fromdynamic
performed the path planning
obstacle results
avoidance threein Figure
times 21, it the
throughout canpath
be planning
seen that the UGV successfully
process,
and each timedynamic
performed it was ableobstacle
to effectively avoid moving
avoidance obstacles.
three times At the same time,
throughout thethepath
UGVplanning process,
was also able to search the global path from the starting point to the end point with the
and each time it was able to effectively avoid moving obstacles. At the same time, the UGV
help of the BA*-MAPF algorithm, and always stayed away from the obstacles present in
was also able toensuring
the environment, searchthe the global
safety of thepath
path.from the starting point to the end point with the
help of the BA*-MAPF algorithm, and always stayed away from the obstacles present in
5.5. environment,
the Path Planning in 3D Space
ensuring the safety of the path.
In order to better simulate the real situation and confirm the applicability of the BA*-
MAPF
5.5. algorithm
Path in complex
Planning environments, it is necessary to carry out simulations in a
in 3D Space
3D environment for verification. In this part of the experiment, we use 3D environment
In order
modeling to better
for simulation, simulate
with the real
an environment situation
size of 100 × 100 ×and
100, confirm the applicability
a blue hexagram as of the
BA*-MAPF algorithm in complex environments, it is necessary to carry
the starting point, a green circle as the target point, and a red curve representing the final out simulations in
path generated by the algorithm. The colored grid points represent randomly generated
a 3D environment for verification. In this part of the experiment, we use 3D environment
3D obstacles,
modeling forwith darker colors
simulation, indicating
with lower elevation
an environment sizeandof lighter
100 ×colors
100 ×indicating
100, a blue hexagram as
higher elevation. If the UGV hits an obstacle, the experiment fails. The experimental re-
the starting point, a green
sults are shown in Figure 22.
circle as the target point, and a red curve representing the final
path generated by the algorithm. The colored grid points represent randomly generated 3D
obstacles, with darker colors indicating lower elevation and lighter colors indicating higher
elevation. If the UGV hits an obstacle, the experiment fails. The experimental results are
shown in Figure 22.
Utilizing the BA*-MAPF algorithm, our UGV demonstrates exceptional navigation capa-
bilities through 3D mountain terrains, as evidenced by the path planning results in Figure 22,
effectively avoiding obstacles and securing a route from start to end. This algorithm enables
the UGV to conduct comprehensive global path searches, consistently yielding shorter and
more efficient paths. Our simulation experiments substantiate the BA*-MAPF algorithm’s ef-
fectiveness and adaptability in complex environments, showcasing its potential to significantly
enhance UGV navigational performance in challenging terrains.
Electronics 2024, 13,
Electronics 2024, 13, 972
x FOR PEER REVIEW 33
31 of 35
of 33

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Figure 22.
Figure 22. Path
Path planning
planningin
inaa3D
3Denvironment.
environment.(a)
(a)BA*-MAPF
BA*-MAPFalgorithm
algorithmfor
forpath
pathplanning
planninginin scene
scene 1.
1. (b) Top view of the path in scene 1. (c) BA*-MAPF algorithm for path planning in scene 2. (d) Top
(b) Top view of the path in scene 1. (c) BA*-MAPF algorithm for path planning in scene 2. (d) Top
view of the path in scene 2.
view of the path in scene 2.
Utilizing the BA*-MAPF algorithm, our UGV demonstrates exceptional navigation
6. Conclusions
capabilities through 3D mountain terrains, as evidenced by the path planning results in
The BA*-MAPF algorithm resolves the limitations of the A* algorithm, including
Figure 22, effectively avoiding obstacles and securing a route from start to end. This algo-
its high computational demand, generation of suboptimal paths, and issues with path
rithm enablescontinuity,
smoothness, the UGV toand conduct comprehensive
redundancy, global path searches,
thereby significantly boostingconsistently yield-
overall efficiency.
ing shorter and more efficient paths. Our simulation experiments substantiate
By incorporating the MAPF component, it effectively navigates around the traditional the BA*-
MAPF algorithm’s effectiveness and adaptability in complex environments, showcasing
pitfalls of the APF algorithm, such as susceptibility to local optima and challenges in
its potential
reaching to significantly
endpoints, enhancingenhance UGV navigational
the accuracy performance
of path planning. Theinintroduction
challengingof ter-
a
rains.
bidirectional alternating search strategy markedly increases the efficiency of the path search
process. Furthermore, by employing interpolation to remove redundant path nodes, the
6. Conclusions
algorithm not only shortens the path length but also reduces the required computation time,
The BA*-MAPF
streamlining algorithm
the pathfinding resolves
process the limitations
for optimized of the A*
navigational algorithm,
outcomes. including
Smoother its
paths
highobtained
are computational demand,
by utilizing generation
cubic B-spline of suboptimal
interpolation curves.paths, and issues
The potential with path
field function is
smoothness,
modified andcontinuity,
a distance and redundancy,
factor is introduced thereby significantly
to improve boosting
the local overall
optimality andefficiency.
the target
By incorporating
unreachability the MAPF
problem component,
that tends to occurit in
effectively navigates around
the APF algorithm. the traditional
Path planning pit-
in dynamic
obstacle environments
falls of the APF algorithm,is thus
suchrealized. Finally, simulation
as susceptibility experiments
to local optima were conducted
and challenges in
in reaching
three static scenes and an urban dynamic environment. Our simulation results
endpoints, enhancing the accuracy of path planning. The introduction of a bidirectional demonstrate
alternating search strategy markedly increases the efficiency of the path search process.
Electronics 2024, 13, 972 32 of 33

that the BA*-MAPF algorithm surpasses traditional algorithms such as GA, PSO, GWO,
APF, and A* in key aspects of planning, including time, path length, number of turning
points, and corners. The paths generated by the BA*-MAPF algorithm are notably more
suited to UGV navigation in complex environments, showcasing its superior capability
to efficiently and effectively chart courses that are optimal for UGV movement, thereby
highlighting its significant advancements in path planning technology.
However, many application scenarios of UGVs are located in complex 3D dynamic
environments where unexpected situations may arise. Therefore, we plan to design more
comprehensive collision avoidance algorithms to solve the path planning problem of UGVs
in these complex 3D dynamic environments in our future research.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, X.M.; methodology, X.M.; software, X.M.; validation, X.M.;
formal analysis, X.M.; investigation, X.M.; resources, X.F.; data curation, X.M.; writing—original
draft, X.M.; writing—review and editing, X.M. and X.F.; visualization, X.M.; supervision, X.F.; project
administration, X.F.; funding acquisition, X.F. All authors have read and agreed to the published
version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Data Availability Statement: Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created
or analyzed in this study.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Zhang, X.; Wang, J.; Fang, Y.; Yuan, J. Multilevel Humanlike Motion Planning for Mobile Robots in Complex Indoor Environments.
IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng. 2019, 16, 1244–1258. [CrossRef]
2. Zhang, T.; Li, Q.; Zhang, C.; Liang, H.; Li, P.; Wang, T.; Li, S.; Zhu, Y.; Wu, C. Trends in Intelligent Unmanned Autonomous
Systems. Unmanned Syst. Technol. 2018, 1, 11–22.
3. Pan, F.; Qi, R.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, L. A Review of Driverless Vehicle Research and Development Outlook. Technol. Innov. Appl.
2017, 2, 27–28.
4. Chen, Y.; Cheng, Q.; Shao, Y.; Hu, G. An overview of the development of self-driving cars. Auto Ind. Res. 2018, 4, 57–59.
5. Chen, J.; Tan, C.; Mo, R.; Zhang, H.; Cai, G.; Li, H. Research on path planning of three-neighbor search A* algorithm combined
with artificial potential field. Int. J. Adv. Robot. Syst. 2021, 18, 3. [CrossRef]
6. Ntakolia, C.; Moustakidis, S.; Siouras, A. Autonomous path planning with obstacle avoidance for smart assistive systems. Expert
Syst. Appl. 2023, 213, 119049. [CrossRef]
7. Zhao, S.; Hwang, S.H. Complete coverage path planning scheme for autonomous navigation ROS-based robots. ICT Express 2024,
10, 83–89. [CrossRef]
8. Ali, H.; Xiong, G.; Haider, M.H.; Tamir, T.S.; Dong, X.; Shen, Z. Feature selection-based decision model for UAV path planning on
rough terrains. Expert Syst. Appl. 2023, 232, 120713. [CrossRef]
9. Ma, G.; Duan, Y.; Li, M.; Xie, Z.; Zhu, J. A probability smoothing Bi-RRT path planning algorithm for indoor robot. Future Gener.
Comput. Syst. 2023, 143, 349–360. [CrossRef]
10. Zhang, W.; Wang, N.; Wu, W. A hybrid path planning algorithm considering AUV dynamic constraints based on improved A*
algorithm and APF algorithm. Ocean Eng. 2023, 285, 115333. [CrossRef]
11. Parhi, D.R.; Kashyap, A.K. Humanoid robot path planning using memory-based gravity search algorithm and enhanced
differential evolution approach in a complex environment. Expert Syst. Appl. 2023, 215, 119423.
12. Su, Y.; Luo, J.; Zhuang, J.; Song, S.; Huang, B.; Zhang, L. A constrained locking sweeping method and velocity obstacle based path
planning algorithm for unmanned surface vehicles in complex maritime traffic scenarios. Ocean Eng. 2023, 279, 113538. [CrossRef]
13. Zhang, G.; Han, J.; Li, J.; Zhang, X. APF-based intelligent navigation approach for USV in presence of mixed potential directions:
Guidance and control design. Ocean Eng. 2022, 260, 111972. [CrossRef]
14. Agirrebeitia, J.; Avilés, R.; De Bustos, I.F.; Ajuria, G. A new APF strategy for path planning in environments with obstacles. Mech.
Mach. Theory 2005, 40, 645–658. [CrossRef]
15. Fink, W.; Baker, V.R.; Brooks, A.J.W.; Flammia, M.; Dohm, J.M.; Tarbell, M.A. Globally optimal rover traverse planning in 3D
using Dijkstra’s algorithm for multi-objective deployment scenarios. Planet. Space Sci. 2019, 179, 104707. [CrossRef]
16. Ma, Y.; Zhao, Y.; Li, Z.; Yan, X.; Bi, H.; Królczyk, G. A new coverage path planning algorithm for unmanned surface mapping
vehicle based on A-star based searching. Appl. Ocean Res. 2022, 123, 103163. [CrossRef]
17. Yu, S.; Chen, J.; Liu, G.; Tong, X.; Sun, Y. SOF-RRT*: An improved path planning algorithm using spatial offset sampling. Eng.
Appl. Artif. Intell. 2023, 126, 106875. [CrossRef]
Electronics 2024, 13, 972 33 of 33

18. Gao, Q. Path planning algorithm of robot arm based on improved RRT* and BP neural network algorithm. J. King Saud
Univ.-Comput. Inf. Sci. 2023, 35, 101650. [CrossRef]
19. Fan, J.; Chen, X.; Liang, X. UAV trajectory planning based on bi-directional APF-RRT* algorithm with goal-biased. Expert Syst.
Appl. 2023, 213, 119137. [CrossRef]
20. Liang, Y.; Zhao, H. CCPF-RRT*: An improved path planning algorithm with consideration of congestion. Expert Syst. Appl. 2023,
228, 120403. [CrossRef]
21. Qu, C.; Gai, W.; Zhang, J.; Zhong, M. A novel hybrid grey wolf optimizer algorithm for unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) path
planning. Knowl.-Based Syst. 2020, 194, 105530. [CrossRef]
22. Gupta, H.; Verma, O.P. A novel hybrid coyote—Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm for three-dimensional constrained
trajectory planning of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. Appl. Soft Comput. 2023, 147, 110776. [CrossRef]
23. Ma, Y.; Mao, Z.; Wang, T.; Qin, J.; Ding, W.; Meng, X. Obstacle avoidance path planning of unmanned submarine vehicle in ocean
current environment based on improved firework-ant colony algorithm. Comput. Electr. Eng. 2020, 87, 106773. [CrossRef]
24. Wang, Z.; Li, G.; Ren, J. Dynamic path planning for unmanned surface vehicle in complex offshore areas based on hybrid
algorithm. Comput. Commun. 2021, 166, 49–56. [CrossRef]
25. Yu, Z.; Yuan, J.; Li, Y.; Yuan, C.; Deng, S. A path planning algorithm for mobile robot based on water flow potential field method
and beetle antennae search algorithm. Comput. Electr. Eng. 2023, 109, 108730. [CrossRef]
26. Han, Z.; Chen, M.; Zhu, H.; Wu, Q. Ground threat prediction-based path planning of unmanned autonomous helicopter using
hybrid enhanced artificial bee colony algorithm. Def. Technol. 2023; in press. [CrossRef]
27. Wang, T.; Wang, L.; Wang, Y. Monte Carlo-based improved ant colony optimization for path planning of welding robot. J. King
Saud Univ.-Comput. Inf. Sci. 2023, 35, 101603. [CrossRef]
28. Gu, Q.; Zhen, R.; Liu, J.; Li, C. An improved RRT algorithm based on prior AIS information and DP compression for ship path
planning. Ocean Eng. 2023, 279, 114595. [CrossRef]
29. Li, X.; Yu, S. Three-dimensional path planning for AUVs in ocean currents environment based on an improved compression
factor particle swarm optimization algorithm. Ocean Eng. 2023, 280, 114610. [CrossRef]
30. Liu, C.; Wu, L.; Xiao, W.; Li, G.; Xu, D.; Guo, J.; Li, W. An improved heuristic mechanism ant colony optimization algorithm for
solving path planning. Knowl.-Based Syst. 2023, 271, 110540. [CrossRef]
31. Xu, Z.; Van Doren, M. A Museum Visitors Guide with the A* Pathfinding Algorithm. In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE International
Conference on Computer Science and Automation Engineering (CSAE 2011), Shanghai, China, 10–12 June 2011.
32. Li, X.; Gao, X.; Zhang, W.; Hao, L. Smooth and collision-free trajectory generation in cluttered environments using cubic B-spline
form. Mech. Mach. Theory 2022, 169, 104606. [CrossRef]
33. Qu, H.; Xing, K.; Alexander, T. An improved genetic algorithm with co-evolutionary strategy for global path planning of multiple
mobile robots. Neurocomputing 2013, 120, 509–517. [CrossRef]
34. Song, B.; Wang, Z.; Zou, L. An improved PSO algorithm for smooth path planning of mobile robots using continuous high-degree
Bezier curve. Appl. Soft Comput. 2021, 100, 106960. [CrossRef]
35. Yu, X.; Jiang, N.; Wang, X.; Li, M. A hybrid algorithm based on grey wolf optimizer and differential evolution for UAV path
planning. Expert Syst. Appl. 2023, 215, 119327. [CrossRef]
36. Rao, J.; Xiang, C.; Xi, J.; Chen, J.; Lei, J.; Giernacki, W.; Liu, M. Path planning for dual UAVs cooperative suspension transport
based on artificial potential field-A* algorithm. Knowl.-Based Syst. 2023, 277, 110797. [CrossRef]
37. Sturtevant, N.R. Benchmarks for grid-based pathfinding. IEEE Trans. Comput. Intell. AI Games 2012, 4, 144–148. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.