Global planner (A*, Dijkstra) in ROS - Performance & Optimization

Performance: Global planner (A*, Dijkstra)

MEDIUM IMPACT

This affects the time it takes for the robot to compute a path and start moving, impacting responsiveness and user experience in navigation tasks.

Choosing a pathfinding algorithm for robot navigation

ROS

Use A* algorithm with an admissible heuristic (e.g., Euclidean distance):

// Pseudocode
while openSet not empty:
  current = node with lowest cost + heuristic
  for each neighbor of current:
    update cost if cheaper path found

return shortest path

A* guides search towards goal, exploring fewer nodes and reducing computation time.

📈 Performance GainReduces CPU time by up to 70% on large maps; faster path calculation and robot response.

Choosing a pathfinding algorithm for robot navigation

ROS

Use Dijkstra's algorithm without heuristics on large maps:

// Pseudocode
while openSet not empty:
  current = node with lowest cost
  for each neighbor of current:
    update cost if cheaper path found

return shortest path

Dijkstra explores all nodes equally, causing high CPU usage and slow path calculation on large maps.

📉 Performance CostBlocks CPU for hundreds of milliseconds to seconds depending on map size; delays robot start.

Performance Comparison

Pattern	CPU Usage	Nodes Explored	Calculation Time	Verdict
Dijkstra (no heuristic)	High	All reachable nodes	Slow on large maps	[X] Bad
A* with heuristic	Medium	Fewer nodes near goal	Faster path calculation	[OK] Good

Rendering Pipeline

The global planner runs on the CPU before robot movement. It processes the map data, calculates the path, and outputs waypoints. This step happens before rendering or robot actuation.

→CPU Computation

→Path Calculation

⚠️ BottleneckCPU Computation during pathfinding

Optimization Tips

1Use A* with an admissible heuristic for faster pathfinding than plain Dijkstra.

2Avoid exploring all nodes; guide search to reduce CPU load and delay.

3Profile planner CPU usage to detect slow path calculations.

Performance Quiz - 3 Questions

Which pathfinding algorithm generally computes paths faster on large maps?

A A* with a good heuristic

B Dijkstra without heuristic

C Breadth-first search

D Depth-first search

DevTools: rosbag / rqt_console / CPU profiler

How to check: Record planner execution with rosbag, analyze CPU usage with profiler, and check planner logs in rqt_console.

What to look for: High CPU spikes or long planner execution times indicate inefficient pathfinding.

Practice

1. What is the main difference between the A* algorithm and Dijkstra's algorithm in ROS global planners?

easy

A. Dijkstra uses a heuristic, while A* explores all paths evenly.

B. A* uses a heuristic to guide the search, while Dijkstra explores all paths evenly.

C. Both algorithms use heuristics but in different ways.

D. Neither algorithm considers obstacles in the map.

Solution

1. Step 1: Understand Dijkstra's algorithm behavior

   Dijkstra explores all possible paths evenly without using heuristics, ensuring the shortest path but potentially slower.

2. Step 2: Understand A* algorithm behavior

   A* uses a heuristic function to estimate the cost to the goal, guiding the search more efficiently and often faster.

3. Final Answer:

   A* uses a heuristic to guide the search, while Dijkstra explores all paths evenly. -> Option B

4. Quick Check:

   Heuristic guides A*; Dijkstra explores evenly [OK]

Hint: Remember: A* uses heuristics, Dijkstra does not [OK]

Common Mistakes:

• Confusing which algorithm uses heuristics
• Thinking both ignore obstacles
• Assuming both explore paths the same way

2. Which of the following is the correct way to initialize a Dijkstra planner in ROS using C++?

easy

A. auto planner = new DijkstraPlanner();

B. DijkstraPlanner planner = new DijkstraPlanner();

C. auto planner = DijkstraPlanner();

D. DijkstraPlanner planner();

Solution

1. Step 1: Understand object initialization in modern C++

   Using 'auto' with direct initialization calls the constructor properly and manages type automatically.

2. Step 2: Analyze each option

   auto planner = new DijkstraPlanner(); uses 'new' which returns a pointer, not an object. DijkstraPlanner planner = new DijkstraPlanner(); attempts to assign a pointer to an object, causing a type mismatch compile error. DijkstraPlanner planner(); is a function declaration, not an object. auto planner = DijkstraPlanner(); correctly initializes an object with automatic type deduction.

3. Final Answer:

   auto planner = DijkstraPlanner(); -> Option C

4. Quick Check:

   Use auto with constructor for clean initialization [OK]

Hint: Use 'auto planner = ClassName();' for simple object creation [OK]

Common Mistakes:

• Using parentheses that declare a function, not an object
• Using 'new' without managing pointers
• Not using auto for type deduction

3. Given the following ROS global planner code snippet using A*:

std::vector<Point> path = planner.makePlan(start, goal);
std::cout << path.size() << std::endl;

If the planner finds a path with 5 points, what will be printed?

medium

A. 0

B. 4

C. 6

D. 5

Solution

1. Step 1: Understand the return value of makePlan()

   The makePlan function returns a vector of points representing the path from start to goal, including both points.

2. Step 2: Analyze the output of path.size()

   If the planner finds a path with 5 points, the vector size is 5, so printing path.size() outputs 5.

3. Final Answer:

   5 -> Option D

4. Quick Check:

   Path points count equals vector size [OK]

Hint: Path size equals number of points including start and goal [OK]

Common Mistakes:

• Assuming path size excludes start or goal
• Confusing index with size
• Thinking path size counts edges, not points

4. You have this snippet in your ROS global planner node:

std::vector<Point> path = planner.makePlan(start, goal);
for (int i = 0; i <= path.size(); i++) {
  std::cout << path[i].x << "," << path[i].y << std::endl;
}

What is the error in this code?

medium

A. Using <= in the loop causes out-of-bounds access.

B. The loop variable should be a float, not int.

C. The path vector is not initialized.

D. The makePlan function does not return a vector.

Solution

1. Step 1: Analyze the loop condition

   The loop runs from i = 0 to i <= path.size(), which means it tries to access path[path.size()] on the last iteration.

2. Step 2: Understand vector indexing

   Vectors are zero-indexed, so valid indices are 0 to path.size() - 1. Accessing path[path.size()] causes out-of-bounds error.

3. Final Answer:

   Using <= in the loop causes out-of-bounds access. -> Option A

4. Quick Check:

   Loop index must be less than size, not less or equal [OK]

Hint: Use i < path.size() in loops to avoid out-of-bounds [OK]

Common Mistakes:

• Using <= instead of < in loops
• Confusing vector size with last index
• Assuming makePlan returns empty vector

5. In a ROS global planner using A*, you want to modify the heuristic to prefer paths farther from obstacles for safety. Which approach correctly applies this change?

hard

A. Add a penalty to the heuristic cost for points near obstacles.

B. Subtract a penalty from the heuristic cost for points near obstacles.

C. Add a penalty to the heuristic cost for points far from obstacles.

D. Ignore the heuristic and use Dijkstra instead.

Solution

1. Step 1: Understand heuristic modification goal

   To prefer paths farther from obstacles, the heuristic should favor those points by lowering their cost or penalizing points near obstacles.

2. Step 2: Analyze penalty application

   Adding a penalty to the heuristic cost for points near obstacles increases their cost, which discourages paths near obstacles, as desired for safety.

3. Step 3: Choose correct approach

   Add a penalty to the heuristic cost for points near obstacles. correctly adds a penalty to points near obstacles, increasing their heuristic cost and discouraging proximity for safer paths.

4. Final Answer:

   Add a penalty to the heuristic cost for points near obstacles. -> Option A

5. Quick Check:

   Modify heuristic cost to prefer points near obstacles [OK]

Hint: Adjust heuristic cost to favor desired path traits [OK]

Common Mistakes:

• Confusing penalty direction for heuristic
• Ignoring heuristic and switching algorithms unnecessarily
• Not understanding heuristic impact on path choice