ISSN 3083-4471 API Registry JSON Sitemap
TIRAS Transactions on Intelligent Robotics and Autonomous Systems An open access journal of Kaggleyes Academy
TIRAS > Vol. 1, No. 2 (August 2026) > KAGG:2608.00005
Vol. 1, No. 2 (August 2026) — Article KAGG:2608.00005

Range-Plane Abstractions for Legged Robot Navigation in Cluttered Interiors

Authors: Omar Farouk, Maximilian Weber, Lin Zhao

Perception and Control Group, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany

[Received 2026-07-26; accepted 2026-08-06; published online 2026-08-09]

Abstract:

Legged navigation in building interiors needs more than a floor map but much less than a dense volumetric forecast. Two-dimensional floor projections discard the step heights and overhead clearances that decide whether a quadruped must crawl, walk normally, or raise its body, whereas full three-dimensional future-range prediction spends most of its output on elevations that no motion mode queries. This paper introduces range-plane abstractions: a small set of control-aligned planes, namely floor, low-obstacle, and headroom, each carrying its own future-range map along the directions the robot is predicted to execute. The height bands of the planes are anchored to the body envelope of the active motion mode (crawl, standard, or raised), and the local planner selects the plane set together with the mode, so that each feasibility query reduces to a first-hit range and an extremal height within one band. In Isaac Lab apartment suites (8 floor plans, 5 seeds, 30 trials each) and on a 900 m four-floor office-building course traversed by an ANYmal, the abstraction reduces predictor output dimensionality by 61.4 percent relative to a dense reference, against 56.6 percent for full three-dimensional future-range prediction. It also lowers p95 query latency from 9.2 to 8.9 ms, uses 842k instead of 931k predictor parameters, and raises task success from 85.9 to 90.2 percent. Ablations attribute the largest share of the gain to the low-obstacle plane; recorded failures, including a late mode switch at a 12 cm step, are analyzed.

Journal: Transactions on Intelligent Robotics and Autonomous Systems (TIRAS)
Volume / Issue: Vol. 1, No. 2 (August 2026)
Article ID: KAGG:2608.00005
DOI: 10.5803/kagg.2608.00005
Received: 2026-07-26
Accepted: 2026-08-06
Published online: 2026-08-09
License: CC BY 4.0

References (41)

  1. T. Zang, S. Wang, H. Huang, and S. Cheng. FutureRay: Control-Aligned Future Range for Agile Quadruped Navigation. arXiv:2608.01197, 2026. arXiv:2608.01197
  2. J. Hwangbo, J. Lee, A. Dosovitskiy, D. Bellicoso, V. Tsounis, V. Koltun, and M. Hutter. Learning Agile and Dynamic Motor Skills for Legged Robots. arXiv:1901.08652, 2019. arXiv:1901.08652
  3. J. Lee, J. Hwangbo, L. Wellhausen, V. Koltun, and M. Hutter. Learning Quadrupedal Locomotion over Challenging Terrain. arXiv:2010.11251, 2020. arXiv:2010.11251
  4. T. Miki, J. Lee, J. Hwangbo, L. Wellhausen, V. Koltun, and M. Hutter. Learning Robust Perceptive Locomotion for Quadrupedal Robots in the Wild. arXiv:2201.08117, 2022. arXiv:2201.08117
  5. N. Rudin, D. Hoeller, P. Reist, and M. Hutter. Learning to Walk in Minutes Using Massively Parallel Deep Reinforcement Learning. arXiv:2109.11978, 2021. arXiv:2109.11978
  6. A. Kumar, Z. Fu, D. Pathak, and J. Malik. RMA: Rapid Motor Adaptation for Legged Robots. arXiv:2107.04034, 2021. arXiv:2107.04034
  7. A. Agarwal, A. Kumar, J. Malik, and D. Pathak. Legged Locomotion in Challenging Terrains using Egocentric Vision. arXiv:2211.07638, 2022. arXiv:2211.07638
  8. Z. Zhuang, Z. Fu, J. Wang, C. Atkeson, S. Schwertfeger, C. Finn, and H. Zhao. Robot Parkour Learning. arXiv:2309.05665, 2023. arXiv:2309.05665
  9. X. Cheng, K. Shi, A. Agarwal, and D. Pathak. Extreme Parkour with Legged Robots. arXiv:2309.14341, 2023. arXiv:2309.14341
  10. D. Hoeller, N. Rudin, D. Sako, and M. Hutter. ANYmal Parkour: Learning Agile Navigation for Quadrupedal Robots. arXiv:2306.14874, 2023. arXiv:2306.14874
  11. N. Rudin, D. Hoeller, M. Bjelonic, and M. Hutter. Advanced Skills by Learning Locomotion and Local Navigation End-to-End. arXiv:2209.12827, 2022. arXiv:2209.12827
  12. D. Hoeller, L. Wellhausen, F. Farshidian, and M. Hutter. Learning a State Representation and Navigation in Cluttered and Dynamic Environments. arXiv:2103.04351, 2021. arXiv:2103.04351
  13. C. Zhang, J. Jin, J. Frey, N. Rudin, M. Mattamala, C. Cadena, and M. Hutter. Resilient Legged Local Navigation: Learning to Traverse with Compromised Perception End-to-End. arXiv:2310.03581, 2023. arXiv:2310.03581
  14. J. Lee, M. Bjelonic, A. Reske, L. Wellhausen, T. Miki, and M. Hutter. Learning Robust Autonomous Navigation and Locomotion for Wheeled-Legged Robots. arXiv:2405.01792, 2024. arXiv:2405.01792
  15. T. Miki, L. Wellhausen, R. Grandia, F. Jenelten, T. Homberger, and M. Hutter. Elevation Mapping for Locomotion and Navigation using GPU. arXiv:2204.12876, 2022. arXiv:2204.12876
  16. L. Wellhausen and M. Hutter. ArtPlanner: Robust Legged Robot Navigation in the Field. arXiv:2303.01420, 2023. arXiv:2303.01420
  17. J. Frey, M. Mattamala, N. Chebrolu, C. Cadena, M. Fallon, and M. Hutter. Fast Traversability Estimation for Wild Visual Navigation. arXiv:2305.08510, 2023. arXiv:2305.08510
  18. R. Grandia, F. Jenelten, S. Yang, F. Farshidian, and M. Hutter. Perceptive Locomotion through Nonlinear Model Predictive Control. arXiv:2208.08373, 2022. arXiv:2208.08373
  19. F. Jenelten, R. Grandia, F. Farshidian, and M. Hutter. TAMOLS: Terrain-Aware Motion Optimization for Legged Systems. arXiv:2206.14049, 2022. arXiv:2206.14049
  20. D. Hoeller, N. Rudin, C. Choy, A. Anandkumar, and M. Hutter. Neural Scene Representation for Locomotion on Structured Terrain. arXiv:2206.08077, 2022. arXiv:2206.08077
  21. R. Yang, G. Yang, and X. Wang. Neural Volumetric Memory for Visual Locomotion Control. arXiv:2304.01201, 2023. arXiv:2304.01201
  22. Z. Fu, A. Kumar, A. Agarwal, H. Qi, J. Malik, and D. Pathak. Coupling Vision and Proprioception for Navigation of Legged Robots. arXiv:2112.02094, 2021. arXiv:2112.02094
  23. S. Kareer, N. Yokoyama, D. Batra, S. Ha, and J. Truong. ViNL: Visual Navigation and Locomotion Over Obstacles. arXiv:2210.14791, 2022. arXiv:2210.14791
  24. H. Oleynikova, Z. Taylor, M. Fehr, R. Siegwart, and J. Nieto. Voxblox: Incremental 3D Euclidean Signed Distance Fields for On-Board MAV Planning. arXiv:1611.03631, 2016. arXiv:1611.03631
  25. X. Zhou, Z. Wang, H. Ye, C. Xu, and F. Gao. EGO-Planner: An ESDF-free Gradient-based Local Planner for Quadrotors. arXiv:2008.08835, 2020. arXiv:2008.08835
  26. G. Williams, P. Drews, B. Goldfain, J. M. Rehg, and E. A. Theodorou. Information-Theoretic Model Predictive Control: Theory and Applications to Autonomous Driving. arXiv:1707.02342, 2017. arXiv:1707.02342
  27. J. Philion and S. Fidler. Lift, Splat, Shoot: Encoding Images From Arbitrary Camera Rigs by Implicitly Unprojecting to 3D. arXiv:2008.05625, 2020. arXiv:2008.05625
  28. Z. Li, W. Wang, H. Li, E. Xie, C. Sima, T. Lu, Y. Qiao, and J. Dai. BEVFormer: Learning Bird's-Eye-View Representation from Multi-Camera Images via Spatiotemporal Transformers. arXiv:2203.17270, 2022. arXiv:2203.17270
  29. Y. Huang, W. Zheng, Y. Zhang, J. Zhou, and J. Lu. Tri-Perspective View for Vision-Based 3D Semantic Occupancy Prediction. arXiv:2302.07817, 2023. arXiv:2302.07817
  30. W. Tong, C. Sima, T. Wang, L. Chen, S. Wu, H. Deng, Y. Gu, L. Lu, P. Luo, D. Lin, and H. Li. Scene as Occupancy. arXiv:2306.02851, 2023. arXiv:2306.02851
  31. E. R. Chan et al.. Efficient Geometry-aware 3D Generative Adversarial Networks. arXiv:2112.07945, 2021. arXiv:2112.07945
  32. S. Fridovich-Keil, G. Meanti, F. R. Warburg, B. Recht, and A. Kanazawa. K-Planes: Explicit Radiance Fields in Space, Time, and Appearance. arXiv:2301.10241, 2023. arXiv:2301.10241
  33. G. Kahn, P. Abbeel, and S. Levine. BADGR: An Autonomous Self-Supervised Learning-Based Navigation System. arXiv:2002.05700, 2020. arXiv:2002.05700
  34. D. Shah, A. Sridhar, A. Bhorkar, N. Hirose, and S. Levine. GNM: A General Navigation Model to Drive Any Robot. arXiv:2210.03370, 2022. arXiv:2210.03370
  35. D. Shah, A. Sridhar, N. Dashora, K. Stachowicz, K. Black, N. Hirose, and S. Levine. ViNT: A Foundation Model for Visual Navigation. arXiv:2306.14846, 2023. arXiv:2306.14846
  36. A. Bouman et al.. Autonomous Spot: Long-Range Autonomous Exploration of Extreme Environments with Legged Locomotion. arXiv:2010.09259, 2020. arXiv:2010.09259
  37. M. Tranzatto et al.. CERBERUS: Autonomous Legged and Aerial Robotic Exploration in the Tunnel and Urban Circuits of the DARPA Subterranean Challenge. arXiv:2201.07067, 2022. arXiv:2201.07067
  38. M. Mittal et al.. Orbit: A Unified Simulation Framework for Interactive Robot Learning Environments. arXiv:2301.04195, 2023. arXiv:2301.04195
  39. V. Makoviychuk et al.. Isaac Gym: High Performance GPU-Based Physics Simulation For Robot Learning. arXiv:2108.10470, 2021. arXiv:2108.10470
  40. J. Schulman, F. Wolski, P. Dhariwal, A. Radford, and O. Klimov. Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithms. arXiv:1707.06347, 2017. arXiv:1707.06347
  41. J. Truong, M. Rudolph, N. Yokoyama, S. Chernova, D. Batra, and A. Rai. Rethinking Sim2Real: Lower Fidelity Simulation Leads to Higher Sim2Real Transfer in Navigation. arXiv:2207.10821, 2022. arXiv:2207.10821
Cite this article Omar Farouk, Maximilian Weber, Lin Zhao, "Range-Plane Abstractions for Legged Robot Navigation in Cluttered Interiors," Transactions on Intelligent Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 2026, vol. 1, no. 2, KAGG:2608.00005. DOI: 10.5803/kagg.2608.00005.