Multi-UAV Planning for Cooperative Wildfire Coverage and Tracking with Quality-of-Service Guarantees
This addresses the challenge of ensuring reliable aerial monitoring for safety-critical applications like wildfires, though it is incremental by extending existing coordination methods with performance guarantees.
The paper tackles the problem of multi-UAV cooperative wildfire coverage and tracking by proposing a predictive framework that infers fire propagation dynamics to provide probabilistic performance guarantees, achieving 7.5x and 9.0x smaller tracking errors compared to state-of-the-art benchmarks.
In recent years, teams of robot and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) have been commissioned by researchers to enable accurate, online wildfire coverage and tracking. While the majority of prior work focuses on the coordination and control of such multi-robot systems, to date, these UAV teams have not been given the ability to reason about a fire's track (i.e., location and propagation dynamics) to provide performance guarantee over a time horizon. Motivated by the problem of aerial wildfire monitoring, we propose a predictive framework which enables cooperation in multi-UAV teams towards collaborative field coverage and fire tracking with probabilistic performance guarantee. Our approach enables UAVs to infer the latent fire propagation dynamics for time-extended coordination in safety-critical conditions. We derive a set of novel, analytical temporal, and tracking-error bounds to enable the UAV-team to distribute their limited resources and cover the entire fire area according to the case-specific estimated states and provide a probabilistic performance guarantee. Our results are not limited to the aerial wildfire monitoring case-study and are generally applicable to problems, such as search-and-rescue, target tracking and border patrol. We evaluate our approach in simulation and provide demonstrations of the proposed framework on a physical multi-robot testbed to account for real robot dynamics and restrictions. Our quantitative evaluations validate the performance of our method accumulating 7.5x and 9.0x smaller tracking-error than state-of-the-art model-based and reinforcement learning benchmarks, respectively.