PLOS ONE

RESEARCH ARTICLE

The EBS-A� algorithm: An improved A�

algorithm for path planning
Huanwei Wang ID, Shangjie Lou, Jing Jing*, Yisen Wang, Wei Liu, Tieming Liu
State Key Laboratory of Mathematical Engineering and Advanced Computing, Zhengzhou, China

* [email protected]

a1111111111
a1111111111
Abstract
a1111111111 Path planning plays an essential role in mobile robot navigation, and the A* algorithm is one
a1111111111
a1111111111 of the best-known path planning algorithms. However, the traditional A* algorithm has some
limitations, such as slow planning speed, close to obstacles. In this paper, we propose an
improved A*-based algorithm, called the EBS-A* algorithm, that introduces expansion dis-
tance, bidirectional search, and smoothing into path planning. The expansion distance
means keeping an extra space from obstacles to improve path reliability by avoiding colli-
OPEN ACCESS
sions. Bidirectional search is a strategy searching path from the start node and the goal
Citation: Wang H, Lou S, Jing J, Wang Y, Liu W,
node simultaneously. Smoothing improves path robustness by reducing the number of right-
Liu T (2022) The EBS-A� algorithm: An improved
A� algorithm for path planning. PLoS ONE 17(2): angle turns. In addition, simulation tests for the EBS-A* algorithm are performed, and the
e0263841. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. effectiveness of the proposed algorithm is verified by transferring it to a robot operating sys-
pone.0263841 tem (ROS). The experimental results show that compared with the traditional A* algorithm,
Editor: Yogendra Arya, J.C. Bose University of the proposed algorithm improves the path planning efficiency by 278% and reduces the
Science and Technology, YMCA, INDIA, INDIA number of critical nodes by 91.89% and the number of right-angle turns by 100%.
Received: September 7, 2021

Accepted: January 27, 2022

Published: February 17, 2022

Peer Review History: PLOS recognizes the

benefits of transparency in the peer review
Introduction
process; therefore, we enable the publication of Mobile robots are a comprehensive system that integrates environmental perception, dynamic
all of the content of peer review and author decision-making, behavior control, task planning, and execution. This accomplishes functions
responses alongside final, published articles. The
such as movement, automatic navigation, multisensor control, and network interaction.
editorial history of this article is available here:
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 Mobile robots can be widely used in stations, airports, and post offices, and are rapidly com-
mandeering important roles in our daily lives. Robots must plan an appropriate path to move
Copyright: © 2022 Wang et al. This is an open
when navigating in a complex or uncertain actual environment. Path planning determines a
access article distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License, which collision-free path in a given environment and has been developed in mobile robots in the last
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and few decades.
reproduction in any medium, provided the original Over the past decades, different path planning methods [1–5] have been proposed and
author and source are credited. demonstrated on robots or automated guided vehicles (AGVs) with various applications. Clas-
Data Availability Statement: Relevant data are sical path planning algorithms include genetic algorithm (GA) [6, 7], ant colony optimization
available from Github: https://github.com/ (ACO) algorithm [8–10], rapidly-exploring random trees (RRT) algorithm [11, 12], and
wanghw1003/EBAStar. A-Star (A� ) algorithm [13–15]. The A� algorithm is based on graph searching and is one of the
Funding: The author(s) received no specific most commonly used path planning methods. In the A� algorithm, the optimal path is gener-
funding for this work. ated by convergence.

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 1 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

Competing interests: The authors have declared The performance of the A� algorithm is mainly reflected in the speed of path planning and
that no competing interests exist. the robustness of the planned path. Although scholars have performed much research on the
A� algorithm, there are still some defects, such as small distances between the path and obsta-
cles and slow speed due to right-angle turns. These factors lead to decreasing robustness of the
planned path. The speed of path planning and path smoothness are other issues under research
that determine the efficiency of the algorithm and the speed of the mobile robot. To improve
the robustness of the conventional A� algorithm, expansion distance and path smoothing are
introduced into the proposed algorithm. The expansion distance means keeping an extra
space from obstacles to improve path reliability by avoiding collisions, for the expanded nodes
are no longer traversed, the speed of path planning is improved. The expansion distance is
equivalent to reducing the map scale in some sense. Smoothing improves path reliability by
reducing the number of right-angle turns. To improve the speed of path planning, bidirec-
tional search strategy is introduced into the proposed algorithm. This strategy searches from
the start node and the goal node simultaneously.
The main contributions of the research in this paper are as follows: we propose three meth-
ods for the improvements of the conventional A� algorithm, including expansion distance,
bidirectional search, and smoothing. We introduced these methods into A� algorithm form a
new algorithm named EBS-A� . In addition, simulation tests are performed, and the results
show that compared with the traditional A� algorithm and other variants (A� with expansion
distance, bidirectional search A� and geometric A� [16], the EBS-A� algorithm achieves better
performance with respect to path robustness and path planning speed. In addition, to test its
effectiveness, the EBS-A� algorithm is transplanted into the FS-AIROBOTB mobile robot
hardware platform, produced by China Huaqing Yuanjian, and tested in the real world.
The rest of this manuscript is organized as follows. Section 2 introduces the research per-
formed on the A� algorithm in recent years. In section 3, the basic theory of the A� algorithm is
introduced. In section 4, the three optimization strategies of the A� algorithm, and the pseudo-
code of the EBS-A� algorithm are given. The time complexity analysis of the EBS-A� algorithm
is introduced in section 5. In section 6, the EBS-A� algorithm is tested and compared by simu-
lation. In section 7, the EBS-A� algorithm is tested in the robot operating system (ROS) and its
performance is verified in the actual environment. Last, conclusions are drawn in section 8.

Related work
Path planning algorithms include several classification methods, which are differentiated
based upon available environmental knowledge. There are multiple classification methods for
path planning algorithms. For example, groups include graph search-based algorithms, includ-
ing Dijkstra algorithm, State Lattice algorithm, etc. sampling-based algorithms, including
RRT, etc. Additionally, various research works propose that path planning algorithms can
actually be described as classical search algorithms and heuristic search algorithms. Classical
algorithms include depth-first search (DFS), breadth-first search (BFS), and Dijkstra algo-
rithm. These algorithms are path planning algorithms based on graph search. Heuristic algo-
rithms include A� algorithm, D� algorithm, GA algorithm, ACO algorithm, Artificial Neural
Network (ANN) algorithm, and Simulated Annealing (SA) algorithm.
Path planning algorithms are also divided into global path planning and local path planning
based upon available environmental knowledge. Global path planning seeks the optimal path
given largely complete environmental information and is best performed when the environ-
ment is static and perfectly known to the robot. Therefore, global path planning is also called
static path planning. By contrast, local path planning is most typically performed in unknown
or dynamic environments, and local path planning is also called dynamic path planning.

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 2 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

For application scenarios such as warehousing and logistics, path planning in a static envi-
ronment assumes that the robot perceives the environment and uses local path planning algo-
rithms when the environmental information is not fully grasped. A� is used for shortest path
evaluation based on the information regarding the obstacles present in the static environment
[17]. The shortest path evaluation for the known static environment is a two-level problem.
The problem comprises a selection of feasible node pairs and the shortest path evaluation
based on the obtained feasible node pairs [18]. Neither of the abovementioned criteria are
available in a dynamic environment, which makes the algorithm inefficient and impractical in
dynamic environments. In this case, the dynamic path planning algorithm is not suitable for
use in a static environment. Classical algorithms include D� algorithm, Artificial Potential
Field algorithm. A� algorithm is chosen because it represents the foundational algorithms used
within contemporary real-time path planning solutions in a static environment. Novel
research builds on this algorithm to achieve additional performance and efficiency.
Dijkstra algorithm relies upon a greedy strategy for path planning. It is used to find the
shortest path in a graph. It is concerned with the shortest path solution without formal atten-
tion to the pragmatism of the solution [17]. Such algorithms also include BFS and DFS. The
most prominent disadvantages of these algorithms are that they require traversing the map
completely, which results in a large amount of calculation, low efficiency and weak collision-
free. To overcome Dijkstra’s computational intensity when conducting blind searches, A� [19]
and its variants are presented as state of the art algorithms for use within static environments.
The A� algorithm can plan the shortest path in the map, but it needs to traverse around the
path nodes and select the minimum path cost. Therefore, the algorithm necessitates a large
amount of calculation and long calculation time, and the efficiency of the algorithm will
decrease with the expansion of the map scale [20]. Due to the characteristics of the graph
search algorithm itself, the A� algorithm uses rasterized maps as the map representation
method, which makes its path smoothness poor and results in excessive right-angle turns,
resulting in reduced reliability.
The heuristic function guides the A� algorithm to search for the shortest path. The heuristic
function of the traditional A� algorithm uses Manhattan distance [21], Euclidean distance [22]
and Diagonal distance [23], which are designed in subsequent research. The algorithm plans
the path by employing the heuristic function to calculate the path cost.
There have been many research achievements with respect to the A� algorithm, and we
focus on the efficiency and robustness of the algorithm. Scholars have carried out extensive
research on the efficiency optimization of the A� algorithm. An A� optimization method is
proposed [24] to solve the efficiency problem of the algorithm through two improvements.
First, the evaluation function is weighted to enhance the reliability of the heuristic function.
Second, a node-set centered on a certain point is constructed in the rasterized maps. When the
node set contains obstacle nodes, this node is marked as an “untrusted point” and will not be
searched. These optimizations are applied to improve the efficiency of the A� algorithm, how-
ever, the method increases the calculation requirements of the algorithm. Scholars focus on
the storage of nodes to optimize the A� storage method [25]. The storage method accesses the
array element by searching the sequence number of the node through only one search, while
the traditional A� algorithm needs to traverse multiple nodes to complete the search process.
The method is very limited in improving the efficiency of the algorithm, it only optimizes the
A� algorithm program. A method called time efficiency A� was proposed to improve the effi-
ciency of the algorithm [26]. This method calculates the cost by the heuristic function before
the collision phase instead of the initialization phase; therefore, the algorithm can effectively
reduce the runtime. This method only optimizes the opportunity to calculate the value of the

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 3 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

heuristic function and does not optimize the heuristic function or decrease the number of
search nodes.
The A� optimization methods introduced above only incompletely optimize the efficiency
of the algorithm and still present defects, which means that the efficiency of the algorithm can
still be more thoroughly optimized. None of the above algorithms consider optimizing the
robustness of the algorithm. Therefore, the improvements and variants of the A� algorithm
remain flawed.
A constrained A� method is proposed for unmanned surface vehicles (USVs) in a maritime
environment [21], and the method with a USV enclosed by a circular boundary is a safety dis-
tance constraint on the generation of optimal waypoints to avoid collisions. This reflects the
collision-free performance of the method. The concept of “safety distance” is also proposed in
this research, but the method includes a USV enclosed by a circular boundary, which means
that the USV is surrounded and does not account for obstacles of the maps.
The path is not smooth enough to dynamically avoid collision, which is another obvious
shortcoming of the traditional A� algorithm. To overcome this problem, a global path plan-
ning method that perceives the characteristics of the local environment is proposed [27]. This
method employs the A� algorithm to plan the global optimal path in a known static environ-
ment, deletes redundant nodes, and then generates local sequence nodes on the deleted global
path to optimize the global path. This method guarantees the performance of the A� algorithm
when it is used in a dynamic environment. To overcome the collision issue, smoothing is one
of the most well-known methods. The traditional A� algorithm plans some sharp turns and
causes some problems for mobile robots. A smoothing of the A� algorithm is introduced in
[28]. The smoothed A� algorithm [29] generates path and redundant waypoints by using cubic
spline interpolation and three path smoothers. Smoothing is one of the most effective methods
to reduce right-angle turns and reduce the risk of collision. Several A� optimization algorithms
were used for comparison, evaluation, and application scenario selection in [13], including
several modifications (Basic Theta� , Phi� ) and improvements (RSR, JPS). A Hybrid A� algo-
rithm is proposed and improves the traditional A� algorithm when employed in autonomous
vehicles. This method can plan the shortest possible path in a hybrid environment for a
vehicle.
The existing improved A� algorithm only optimizes either for efficiency or for robustness.
However, there is no existing algorithm aiming at comprehensive performance. Path planning
algorithm plays an essential role in the autonomous navigation of mobile robots. Since mobile
robots are widely used in the real world, it is very necessary to propose an improved A� algo-
rithm with strong robustness and high efficiency. It has huge potential application and com-
mercial value in the industrial field.

Basic theory of traditional A* algorithm

The A� algorithm was first proposed and described in detail in [13], and it is one of the best-
known path planning algorithms. A� algorithm is a heuristic search algorithm, which aims to
find a path from the start node to the goal node with the smallest cost by searching among all
possible paths. Heuristic information related to the characteristics of the problem is utilized to
guide its performance, so it is superior to other blind search algorithms [30]. Due to the heuris-
tic search algorithm, the A� algorithm consists of an Open table, a Closed table, and a heuristic
function and employs the heuristic function to evaluate the distance from an arbitrary node to
the goal node on a 2D plane. The A� algorithm is defined as a best-first algorithm because each
cell in the configuration space is evaluated according to the value.
f ðnÞ ¼ gðnÞ þ hðnÞ ð1Þ

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 4 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

where g(n) is the cost of the path from the start node to the current node n, h(n) is the cost of
the path from node n to the goal node through the selected sequence of nodes, and h(n) is the
heuristic function of the A� algorithm. f(n) is denoted as the evaluation function of node n.
This sequence ends in the actually evaluated node. Each adjacent node of the actually reached
node is evaluated by f(n). The node with the minimum value of f(n) is chosen as the next node
in the sequence. The advantage of the A� algorithm is that other distances can be adopted,
modified, or added as standard distances.

Proposed method
In this section, three optimization strategies are proposed to improve the efficiency and
robustness of the A� algorithm.

Expansion distance
The path generated by the traditional A� algorithm may be very close to the obstacle. If the
path is adopted by a mobile robot as the planning path, the mobile robot will have a high risk
of collision with obstacles. Therefore, it is indispensable to consider maintaining an appropri-
ate distance from obstacles during path planning. The appropriate distance is the concept pro-
posed in this manuscript: expansion distance.
The expansion distance means keeping an extra space around the obstacles as the safe dis-
tance during path planning. Robots adapt rasterized maps as path planning maps. Expansion
distance adopts a grid as the basic unit to expand outward around obstacles. Expansion dis-
tance is the shortest distance that the path is allowed to approach obstacles. The value of the
expansion distance is determined by parameters such as the speed of the robot, the size of the
robot model, and the number of grids.
The nodes of expanded distance will not be visited together with the obstacles during the
path planning. Expansion distance will be used as a “collision buffer” between the robot and
the obstacles, which can effectively reduce the collision risk of the robot during the travel pro-
cess. Therefore, expansion distance can increase the robustness of the algorithm. The superior-
ity of the expansion distance is not limited to enhancing the robustness of the algorithm, it is
also effective in improving the efficiency of the algorithm. Since the expanded nodes are no
longer visited by the algorithm, expansion distance is equivalent to reducing the map scale in
some sense. The total number of nodes that the algorithm needs to traverse is reduced acord-
ingly. Therefore, expansion distance can improve the efficiency of the algorithm. The sche-
matic diagram of expansion distance is shown in Fig 1.
Regarding the selection of the expansion distance size, it is generally selected as a grid of the
rasterized map by default. In the simulation test of this manuscript, we chose a grid as the size
of expansion distance. When the robot radar constructs a real environmental map, the robot is
usually modeled as a cylinder or a sphere. Normally, the expansion distance defaults to the
radius of the cylinder or sphere as the expansion distance in the real environment. This dis-
tance can not only ensure the reliability of the path but also ensure acceptably minimal waste
of the traveling space. The bilateral expansion distances are the size of a robot itself when there
are obstacles on both sides.
How is the expansion distance automatically decided for different environments? This is a
question we must consider. We refer to the robot equivalent model in the robot operating sys-
tem to discuss the expansion distance. In this manuscript, the following assumptions of the
robot and obstacles are made to simplify the model.
The robot model is equivalent to a cylinder in ROS, with a radius of r and cruising speed
Vr, which satisfies Vr � Vmax, where Vmax is the maximum cruising speed determined by the

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 5 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

Fig 1. Schematic diagram of expansion distance.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.g001

performance of the robot. Vr is a speed threshold, Vi is the current speed of the robot. When Vi
� Vr, the expansion distance is only expanded by one node, and when the current speed is
greater than Vr, the probability of a collision between the robot and an obstacle increases. In
this case, the number of expanded nodes should increase. The obstacle is equivalent to one
grid or more square grids. The mapping rule between the robot model and the map is that the
robot radius is equal to the length of a grid. The mapping rule between the number of expan-
sion nodes and the speed is that the ratio of the current speed and the speed threshold.
8
> r Vi � V
<
EðVi Þ ¼ V ð2Þ
>
: i r Vr < Vi � Vmax
Vr

where E(Vi) is the number of expansion nodes. Regarding the selection of the expansion dis-
tance magnitude, when Vi � Vr, the expansion distance defaults to the radius of the cylinder as
the expansion distance. This distance provides a sufficient “collision buffer” for the reliability
of the path, and ensure acceptably minimal waste of the physical space the robot travels. The
bilateral expansion distances are the size of a robot itself when there are obstacles on both
sides. As the speed of the robot increases, the risk of robot collisions will increase. Correspond-
ingly, only expanding the expansion distance can ensure that the robustness of the algorithm
does not decrease. When Vi increases, E(Vi) should increase accordingly, otherwise the risk of
robot collision will increase. Therefore, the determination of the expansion distance follows a
linear relationship with the speed Vi.

Bidirectional search optimization

The A� algorithm is a path planning algorithm based on graph search, which is developed
from BFS. Bidirectional search optimization strategy is a method to complete path search by
traversing nodes in a grid map, so it is reasonable to use the bidirectional search method to
improve the A� algorithm.
BFS is a blind search method and is a traversal algorithm of connected graphs. The purpose
of BFS is to check all nodes in the graph systematically. In other words, BFS does not consider
the possible location of the result and searches the entire graph thoroughly until it finds the
result. The basic search process is that BFS starts from the root node and traverses the nodes of
the tree (graph) along the width of the tree (graph). If all nodes are visited, the algorithm stops.
The queue data structure is generally used to assist in the realization of the BFS algorithm. The
search process of BFS is shown in Fig 2.

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 6 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

Fig 2. The process of BFS.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.g002

The search process of the traditional A� algorithm is unidirectional search, and the search
process occur from the start node to the end node. The bidirectional search method intro-
duced is performed in this manuscript. Bidirectional search simultaneously searches from the
start node to the end node and from the end node to the start node. When an obstacle is
encountered during the search, the algorithm still searches the path until the intersection
according to the established search mode. When the forward and reverse search nodes are
adjacent nodes during the search process, the search process finishes. The positive and nega-
tive incomplete paths are spliced together to form a complete collision-free path. A schematic
diagram of the search optimization is shown in Fig 3. The left figure is the unidirectional
search, and the right figure is the bidirectional search.
The search method introduces a parallel idea and searches from the start node and the goal
node at the same time. A function call completes the two searches of the start node and the
end node, which reduces the number of function calls and improves the path planning effi-
ciency of the algorithm. In addition, the bidirectional search reduces the number of traversed
nodes compared with unidirectional search, which further accelerates the path planning
efficiency.
In schematic diagrams, the green node represents the start node, the red node represents
the end node, the blue node represents the next search node, the yellow node represents the
forward searched node, the gray node represents the reverse searched node, and the purple
node represents the common node to be searched.
The traditional graph search algorithms are not considered the features of the path planning
problem, like DFS and BFS. The path is searched by the strategy set beforehand for any prob-
lem, and the search process will not be optimized according to the features of the problem.
The A� algorithm is developed based on the BFS algorithm. The concept of heuristic is intro-
duced on the basis of the BFS algorithm. The heuristic information is obtained according to
the features of the problem, which will guide the search in the optimal direction. Such as
speeding up the search process and improving efficiency. The traditional A� algorithm uses
Manhattan distance as its heuristic equation. Manhattan distance is defined as follows:
hðnÞ ¼ jxa xb j þ jya yb j ð3Þ

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 7 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

Fig 3. Schematic diagrams of bidirectional search. (a) Unidirectional search. (b) Bidirectional search without obs. (c) Bidirectional search with an obstacle. (d)
Bidirectional search with multiple obstacles.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.g003

h(n) is the heuristic function, (xa,ya) is the coordinates of the goal node, (xb,yb) is the coordi-
nates of any node.

Smoothing optimization
The path of the traditional A� algorithm usually consists of a series of nodes and many polyline
segments connected to them. There are three primary disadvantages regarding the path [29].
First, the goal of the A� algorithm is to find the minimum path length cost in such a way that
the generated jags are not minimized. It sacrifices turning costs to obtain the shortest path.
Second, the planned path is not continuous. Third, due to the existence of right-angle turns,
the mobile robot needs to decelerate sharply during movement, which affects the speed and
path robustness. Therefore, to overcome these shortcomings, the path of the conventional A�
algorithm needs to be smoothed.
Bezier curve is a space curve and has good geometric properties, which is proposed by the
French engineer Pierre Bezier in 1962. Bezier curve is one of the methods used to smooth the

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 8 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

path, it has been widely used in computer graphics and computer-aided design. If the control
point of the Bezier curve is a convex polygon, that is, the feature polygon is convex, the Bezier
curve is also convex, which is one of the advantages of the Bezier curve. Unlike other types of
curves, such as cubic splines or polynomials, Bezier curve does not pass through all the data
points used to define it. The points used to define Bezier curve are called control points. Poly-
gons that can be drawn from these control points are called Bezier polygons. The turning
points are the points where the slope of the curve changes its sign. Bezier curves have fewer
turning points so that it is smoother than cubic splines.
Bezier curve has the following properties:
1. Symmetry, the ith coefficient of the curve is the same as the reciprocal ith coefficient.
2. Convex hull properties, Bezier curve is always contained in the convex hull of the polygon
defined by all control points.
3. End-points properties, The first control point and the last control point on the curve are
exactly the start point and the end point of the Bezier curve.
4. Recursion, which means that the coefficient of the Bezier curve satisfies the following formula.

Bi;n ðtÞ ¼ ð1 tÞBi;n 1 ðtÞ þ tBi 1;n 1 ðtÞ; fi ¼ 0; 1; :::; ng ð4Þ

The radius of curvature of the Bezier curve varies smoothly from the starting point to the
endpoint because of its continuous higher order derivatives. A Bezier curve of degree n is a
parametric curve composed of Bernstein basis polynomials of degree n and it can be defined as:
X
n
PðtÞ ¼ pi Bi;n ðtÞ; t 2 ½0; 1� ð5Þ
i¼1

Where t indicates the normalized time variable, Pi(xi,yi)T represents the coordinate vector of the
ith control point with xi and yi being the components corresponding to the X and Y coordinate,
respectively, Bi,n is the Bernestein basis polynomials, which represents the base function in the
expression of Bezier curve, and it is defined as follows:
n! n i
Bi;n ðtÞ ¼ Cni ti ¼ ti ð1 tÞ ; i ¼ 0; 1; :::; n: ð6Þ
i!ðn iÞ!

The derivatives of Bezier curve are determined by the control points, and the first derivative
of a Bezier curve in formula 5. is expressed as in formula 7. Moreover, higher-order derivatives
of a Bezier curve can also be calculated.

dPðtÞ X
n 1
_
PðtÞ ¼ ¼ n Bi;n 1 ðtÞðPiþ1 Pi Þ ð7Þ
dt i¼0

In the two-dimensional space, the curvature of a Bezier curve with respect to t is expressed
as follows:

1 P_ x ðtÞP€ y ðtÞ P_ y ðtÞP€ x ðtÞ

kðtÞ ¼ ¼ 1:5 ð8Þ
RðtÞ ðP_ 2x ðtÞ þ P_ 2y ðtÞÞ

In the path planning problem, Bezier curve is connected to form a smooth path planning
for mobile robots.

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 9 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

Fig 4. Smoothing optimization strategy for a single right-angle turn.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.g004

During the movement of the mobile robot, when the turning angle is greater than or equal
to 90˚, the lengths of turning steps increase. This type of turn is generally divided into three
steps: 1. decelerate and stop; 2. pivot toward the subsequent direction of travel; and 3. proceed
forward. Both deceleration and acceleration of the mobile robot require engaging the steering
gear, which greatly reduces the speed of the mobile robot.
To increase the practicability of the path reduce the number of such turns and improve the
speed of the mobile robot, this section mainly optimizes the right-angle turns that are prone to
occur during the path planning process. The basic idea is to decompose a 90˚ turn into multiple
small-angle turns to improve the smoothness of the planned path. Since the traditional A� algo-
rithm only considers the nodes in the four directions when searching the path, the turns are all
right-angle turns. There are two cases corresponding to a single turn and a continuous turn:
When there is no obstacle on the inside of the corner to reduce the turning angle, the inflec-
tion point and its adjacent two nodes are replaced with adjacent points in the corner, and a 90˚
right-angle turn is decomposed into two 45˚ acute-angle turns, as shown in Fig 4.
1. When there is a continuous right-angle turn, the inflection point can be removed, and the
two adjacent nodes of the inflection point can be directly connected to convert multiple
right-angle turns into a small number of 45˚ acute-angle turns, as shown in Fig 5.

Fig 5. Smoothing optimization strategy for continuous right-angle turns.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.g005

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 10 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

2. The smoothing optimization of the right-angle turns improves the smoothness of the path
and shortens the length of the path. It reduces the number of right-angle turns, which
affects the turning efficiency and improves the overall efficiency of the robot.

The EBS-A� algorithm pseudocode

The EBS-A� algorithm is implemented through the MATLAB programming language and
software. The code is shown as Algorithm 1.
Algorithm 1 The code of the EBS-A� Algorithm
Input: start node Start_i, end node End_i, environment map Map, esti-
mated total costf(n)
Output: path PATH
1: Initialize Map,PATH_S, PATH_E
2: ExpansionDistance(1)
3: Create positive open list OPEN_LIST_1 and positive close list
CLOSE_LIST_1
4: Create reverse open list OPEN_LIST_2 and reverse close list
CLOSE_LIST_2
5: OPEN_LIST_1.add(Start_i), OPEN_LIST_2.add(End_i)
6: repeat
7: node_s = OPEN_LIST_1.removeNext()
8: PATH_S.add(node_s)
9: search(node_s, OPEN_LIST_1, CLOSE_LIST_1)
10: CLOSE_LIST_1.add(node_s)
11: node_e = OPEN_LIST_2.removeNext()
12: PATH_E.add(node_e)
13: search(node_e, OPEN_LIST_2, CLOSE_LIST_2)
14: CLOSE_LIST_2.add(node_s)
15: until node_s == End_i k node_e == Start_i k OPEN_LIST_1 == ; k
OPEN_LIST_2 == ; k GetNeighber(node_s) \ GetNeighber(node_e) 6¼ ;
16: PATH = PATH_S + PATH_E.reverse()
17: smooth(PATH)
18: return PATH
The execution process of the EBS-A� algorithm consists of four steps: 1. Performing expan-
sion distance optimization on the A� algorithm. 2. Performing bidirectional search on the
algorithm. 3. Generating an unsmooth path. 4. Performing smoothing process to generate a
smooth path. The execution process of the proposed algorithm is shown in Fig 6.

The EBS-A* algorithm time complexity analysis

In this section, combining the above bidirectional search and the smoothing optimization of
right-angle turns, the pseudocode of the EBS-A� algorithm is provided as follows. The algo-
rithm uses a double loop. The inner loop traverses adjacent nodes in four directions, and the

Fig 6. The execution process of the EBS-A� algorithm.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.g006

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 11 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

point with the least cost is marked and added to the open table. The outer loop traverses the
nodes of the open table until the queue traversal ends. There are several factors that exert obvi-
ous effects on the time complexity of various path planning algorithms, such as map scale,
starting node and target node location. In general, the time complexity of various algorithms is
given as follows:
T 2 ½Oðmin½m; n�Þ; Oðm � nÞ� ð9Þ

In formula 9, m and n are the length and width of the map, respectively. Since the bidirec-
tional search is a strategy to search in two directions, when the path is solvable, the path
formed by each search direction is smaller than the whole path, which reduces the number of
nodes added to the open table and decreases the loop frequency. Therefore, the time complex-
ity of the EBS-A� algorithm is less than or equal to half of that of the traditional A� algorithm.

Simulation testing
Experiment
In this section, we mainly simulate and test four algorithms, the traditional A� algorithm, the
A� algorithm with expansion distance, the bidirectional A� algorithm with expansion distance,
and the EBS-A� algorithm. The map scale is 50×50 in the simulation test, and the size of each
obstacle is 5×5 on the map. The location of obstacles is randomly generated on the map based
on the center point, but there are certain rules. The scale of the obstacle occupies a certain pro-
portion of the map scale, which is interpreted as the number of obstacle center points being
1% of the map scale. The four algorithms were tested, and the path planning results are shown
in Fig 7. The statistical results are shown in Table 1.
We use the 50×50 map to represent a moderately cluttered environment. In addition to test
on 50×50 maps, we conducted tests on 100×100 maps, 150×150 maps, and 200×200 maps. The
100×100 maps represent several obstacles and less cluttered environments, the 150×150 maps
represent a lot of obstacles and the highly cluttered environments, and the 200×200 map repre-
sents an environment with no obstacles. In different scale maps, algorithms are tested on a sin-
gle map and randomly generated maps and tested five times on randomized maps.
In Fig 7, the black blocks are randomly generated obstacles, the fluorescent blue blocks
around the obstacles are the expansion distances of the obstacles, the green and gray areas are
the nodes traversed by the forward and reverse searches, respectively, and the red line is the
final path ‘generated by the EBS-A� algorithm.
Table 1 lists the running time of each algorithm required to plan the path, including the
time to complete all operations such as expansion and smoothing. This parameter indicates
the efficiency of the algorithm. The number of nodes and the total distance represent the
length of the planned path length. The number of right-angle turns and the maximum turning
angle correspond to the path smoothness and robustness, respectively. The number of expan-
sion nodes is the total number of nodes searched by the algorithm during path planning: this
parameter affects the efficiency of the algorithm. The number of critical nodes indicates the
number of nodes adjacent to obstacles in the path. The map scales are 50×50. The statistical
results on randomized maps are shown in Table 2, and all data are averages.
The experimental results show that the speed of the EBS-A� algorithm is improved by
approximately 328% compared with that of the conventional A� algorithm. The running time
of the bidirectional search algorithm is approximately 26.37% that of the unidirectional search
algorithm. The test results for other indicators are also in line with expectations. The random-
ized test results are consistent with the results in Table 2.

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 12 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

Fig 7. Simulation results of four algorithms on a 50×50 map. (a) A� algorithm. (b) A� with expansion distance. (c) Bidirectional A� with expansion distance. (d)
EBS-A� algorithm.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.g007

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 13 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

Table 1. Simulation results of four algorithms on a 50×50 map.

Indicators A� algorithm A� with Expansion Distance Bidirectional A� with Expansion Distance EBS-A� algorithm
Running time/s 36.806(100%) 21.782(59.18%) 9.637(26.18%) 9.747(26.48%)
Number of nodes 79 79 79 66
Number of right-angle turns 7 9 8 0
Max turning angle 90˚ 90˚ 90˚ 45˚
Number of expansion nodes 1372 787 679 682
Number of critical nodes 37 0 0 3
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.t001

The path planning results of the 100×100 map are shown in Fig 8, the statistical results on
single map are shown in Table 3, and the statistical results on randomized maps are shown in
Table 4. The path planning results of the 150×150 map are shown in Fig 9, the statistical results
on single map are shown in Table 5, and the statistical results on randomized maps are shown
in Table 6. The path planning results of the 200×200 map are shown in Fig 10, the statistical
results on single map are shown in Table 7, and the statistical results on randomized maps are
shown in Table 8.
As shown in Table 3, the running time of the EBS-A� algorithm is 138.813s and the tradi-
tional A� algorithm is 302.467s on a 100×100 map. The efficiency of the EBS-A� algorithm is
only 2.17 times that of the A� algorithm. As shown in Table 4, the efficiency of the EBS-A�
algorithm is only 2.14 times that of the A� algorithm on randomized 100×100 maps. The statis-
tical results in Tables 3 and 4 show that the test results of the algorithm on the fixed map and
the random map are consistent. The efficiency of the algorithm is reliable.
But the efficiency of the EBS-A� algorithm is 4.7 times that of the A� algorithm on a
150×150 map. The reason is that there are only a few obstacles in the 100×100 map, but there
are dense obstacles in the 150×150 map. In an environment with dense obstacles, the efficiency
of the algorithm is higher. These statistical results have also been verified on 200×200 maps.
the efficiency of the EBS-A� algorithm is 5.79 times that of the A� algorithm on a 200×200
map.
All the statistical results of the simulation test show that the efficiency of the EBS-A� algo-
rithm is significantly improved compared with the traditional A� algorithm. These results ver-
ify the rationality of the algorithm design.
The geometric A� algorithm was proposed in [16] for AGV path planning. The algorithm
was also optimized based on the traditional A� algorithm. The result is shown in Fig 11. To
compare the performance of the EBS-A� and geometric A� algorithms, the rasterized map in
[16] is reproduced, and the map scale is 100×100. The path planning result of the EBS-A� algo-
rithm is shown in Fig 12.

Table 2. Average simulation results of four algorithms on randomized 50×50 maps.

Indicators A� algorithm A� with Expansion Distance Bidirectional A� with Expansion Distance EBS-A� algorithm
Running time/s 33.559(100%) 21.386(63.73%) 5.639(16.80%) 7.835(23.35%)
Number of nodes 79.4 79.4 79.4 67
Number of right-angle turns 6.4 6.2 7 0
Max turning angle 90˚ 90˚ 90˚ 45˚
Number of expansion nodes 1,085 744.8 553 693.8
Number of critical nodes 36.2 0 0 3
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.t002

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 14 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

Fig 8. Simulation results of four algorithms on a 100×100 map. (a) A� algorithm. (b) A� with expansion distance. (c) Bidirectional A� with
expansion distance. (d) EBS-A� algorithm.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.g008

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 15 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

Table 3. Simulation results of four algorithms on a 100×100 map.

Indicators A� algorithm A� with Expansion Distance Bidirectional A� with Expansion Distance EBS-A� algorithm
Running time/s 302.467 271.190 134.719 138.813
Number of nodes 179 179 179 167
Number of right-angle turns 7 9 6 0
Max turning angle 90˚ 90˚ 90˚ 45˚
Number of expansion nodes 7,509 6722 6531 6533
Number of critical nodes 31 0 0 2
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.t003

The experimental data in [16] are reproduced and the test results for the EBS-A� algorithm
are summarized in Table 9.
As shown in Table 9, the experimental data in [16] are reproduced in the 2nd through 6th
columns. It can be seen from the table that the path planning speed of the EBS-A� algorithm is
51.59 times that of the geometric A� algorithm, which is an enormous advantage. The running
time of an algorithm is affected by many factors, such as computer performance, platform, and
programming language. Therefore, the use of absolute time may be unacceptable.
In this research, we have tested the efficiency of the traditional A� algorithm and EBS-A�
algorithm. In [16], authors also have tested the efficiency of the traditional A� algorithm and
the geometric A� algorithm. We can choose the efficiency of the traditional A� algorithm as a
benchmark to compare the efficiency of the EBS-A� algorithm and the geometric A� algo-
rithm. As shown in Table 9, the running time of the A� algorithm is 316.334s and the running
time of the geometric A� algorithm is 292.142s in [16]. The running time of the traditional A�
algorithm is 36.806s and the running time of the EBS-A� algorithm is 9.747s. The histograms
of EBS-A� and geometric A� in Fig 13 are the results of proportional calculations.

Discussion
Efficiency. Here we discuss the efficiency of the algorithm. The experimental results show
that the running time of the EBS-A� algorithm is approximately 26.48% that of the conven-
tional A� algorithm, which means that the path planning efficiency is improved by 278%. The
running time of a bidirectional search by the A� algorithm with an expansion distance is
approximately 44.24% that of the unidirectional search by the A� algorithm with expansion
distance, and the experimental result is consistent with the time complexity analysis intro-
duced in the previous section.
In the comparison testing with Geometric A� , the traditional A� algorithm was also taken
as the benchmark. The proportional comparison method was applied: that is, the running
times of the A� algorithm and the EBS-A� algorithm were calculated, and their ratio was used
to calculate the relative running time. The relative time was also used to compare the running

Table 4. Average simulation results of four algorithms on randomized 100×100 maps.

Indicators A� algorithm A� with Expansion Distance Bidirectional A� with Expansion Distance EBS-A� algorithm
Running time/s 269.335 268.331 128.775 125.677
Number of nodes 179 179 179 170.8
Number of right-angle turns 6 5.7 6 0
Max turning angle 90˚ 90˚ 90˚ 45˚
Number of expansion nodes 7,709.4 7,302.8 6,817.4 6,599
Number of critical nodes 10 0 0 2
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.t004

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 16 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

Fig 9. Simulation results of four algorithms on a 150×150 map. (a) A� algorithm. (b) A� with expansion distance. (c) Bidirectional A� with expansion
distance. (d) EBS-A� algorithm.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.g009

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 17 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

Table 5. Simulation results of four algorithms on a 150×150 map.

Indicators A� algorithm A� with Expansion Distance Bidirectional A� with Expansion Distance EBS-A� algorithm
Running time/s 267.377 100.597 56.755 56.866
Number of nodes 279 285 285 228
Number of right-angle turns 39 47 42 0
Max turning angle 90˚ 90˚ 90˚ 45˚
Number of expansion nodes 7,437 2,931 2,633 2,644
Number of critical nodes 192 0 0 11
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.t005

time of the geometric A� algorithm. The relative running time conversion results are shown in
Fig 13. After the calculation, the speed of the EBS-A� algorithm is 3.52 times that of the geo-
metric A� algorithm, which still provides a large advantage. This is one of the original inten-
tions that guided the design of the EBS-A� algorithm.
The running time of the EBS-A� algorithm is longer than that of the bidirectional search
with an expansion distance because the smoothing process introduced here first traverses the
planned path and smooths it, if there is a right-angle turn. Therefore, the EBS-A� algorithm
sacrifices the running time at a cost that is justified because the path robustness is effectively
enhanced. Through multiple simulation verifications on different map scales, the EBS-A� algo-
rithm has shown excellent performance and consistency.
Robustness. Table 1 shows that the number of path nodes is reduced by 16.46%, while all
right-angle turns are smoothed, and the maximum turning angle is 45˚. As shown in Table 2,
with the conventional A� algorithm, the number of critical nodes is 37 in the original map and
is reduced to 0 after employing the expansion distance. The strategy effectively increases the
path robustness. Moreover, with the EBS-A� algorithm, the number of critical nodes is
increased by 3 because the specific path environment needs to borrow critical points for path
smoothing. This situation does not cause a significant decrease in the path robustness, which
only occurs in a few cases, and the borrowed critical points are only at the corners of the obsta-
cles, which have been smoothed. In combination, with the EBS-A� algorithm, the number of
critical points is reduced by 91.89%.
Compared with the other algorithms, the EBS-A� algorithm proposes the least number of
turns, which is 18, and the path smoothness is better. Since the expansion distance is employed
in the EBS-A� algorithm, critical nodes are used to build barriers, thereby effectively avoiding
collisions and guaranteeing path robustness. The critical node of the optimized path is 0, and
other algorithms have not adopted corresponding protection strategies in performing this test.
As seen from Fig 12, the robustness of the path is guaranteed in the map with dense obstacles
due to protection by the expansion distance. However, in Fig 11, multiple sections of the geo-
metric A� algorithm path are close to the obstacles, and the robustness of the path is greatly
threatened. Therefore, the robustness of the EBS-A� algorithm has a greater advantage than

Table 6. Average simulation results of four algorithms on randomized 150×150 maps.

Indicators A� algorithm A� with Expansion Distance Bidirectional A� with Expansion Distance EBS-A� algorithm
Running time/s 264.789 116.379 45.381 57.032
Number of nodes 279.4 284.2 283.8 233.4
Number of right-angle turns 29 26.2 28 0
Max turning angle 90˚ 90˚ 90˚ 45˚
Number of expansion nodes 8,864.4 3,713.2 2,713 3,325.6
Number of critical nodes 201 0 0 12
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.t006

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 18 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

Fig 10. Simulation results of four algorithms on a 200×200 map. (a) A� algorithm. (b) A� with expansion distance. (c) Bidirectional A� with expansion
distance. (d) EBS-A� algorithm.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.g010

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 19 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

Table 7. Simulation results of four algorithms on a 200×200 map.

Indicators A� algorithm A� with Expansion Distance Bidirectional A� with Expansion Distance EBS-A� algorithm
Running time/s 651.976 309.629 107.401 112.656
Number of nodes 379 413 413 336
Number of right-angle turns 45 61 62 0
Max turning angle 90˚ 90˚ 90˚ 45˚
Number of expansion nodes 12,774 6,157 4,273 4,288
Number of critical nodes 253 0 0 13
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.t007

Table 8. Average simulation results of four algorithms on randomized 200×200 maps.

Indicators A� algorithm A� with Expansion Distance Bidirectional A� with Expansion Distance EBS-A� algorithm
Running time/s 674.438 378.412 116.365 119.974
Number of nodes 380.6 443 414.6 330.6
Number of right-angle turns 43 59.2 60 0
Max turning angle 90˚ 90˚ 90˚ 45˚
Number of expansion nodes 11,809.8 6,598.4 5,238.2 4,426.8
Number of critical nodes 275 0 0 16
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.t008

Fig 11. The path planning of the geometric A� .

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.g011

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 20 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

Fig 12. The path planning of the EBS-A� .

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.g012

the other algorithms, including the geometric A� algorithm. This is another goal pursued by
the developers of the EBS-A� algorithm. Since the EBS-A� algorithm did not pursue the short-
est path as the goal at the beginning of the design, it is not advantageous in terms of the num-
ber of nodes and the total distance. The design idea of the algorithm is to first ensure the
robustness of the path; otherwise, the cost of collisions is far greater than the performance
advantages of other indicators. Therefore, the EBS-A� algorithm gains efficiency and robust-
ness at the cost of path length.

Table 9. Algorithm performance comparison.

Indicators A� BFS Dijkstra DFS Geometric A� EBS-A�
Running time/s 316.334 322.962 316.334 394.83 295.142 9.747
Number of nodes 131 131 131 198 109 161
Total distance 158.167 161.481 158.167 197.415 147.571 182.426
Number of turns 36 33 27 / 27 18
Max turning angle 45˚ 135˚ 45˚ 90˚ 45˚ 45˚
Number of expansion nodes 2246 5936 6047 198 109 219
Number of critical nodes / / / / / 0
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.t009

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 21 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

Fig 13. Comparison graph of algorithm running time.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.g013

The analysis of the test results from a less cluttered to highly cluttered environment shows
that in a more cluttered environment, the advantages of the EBS-A� algorithm are more obvi-
ous than those of the traditional A� algorithm in terms of the robustness index, and the perfor-
mance of the algorithm is collision-free. The difference between the EBS-A� algorithm and the
traditional A� algorithm is that the efficiency of the algorithm is improved by expanding the
distance and bidirectional search, and the robustness of the algorithm is enhanced by expand-
ing the distance and smoothing. An environment without obstacles is a collision-free environ-
ment, if the robot will not collide during travel, the robustness of the algorithm will not be
affected, and the advantage of the EBS-A� algorithm will no longer be obvious. In a barrier-
free environment, there is no fundamental difference between the paths planned by the two
algorithms, and the efficiency of bidirectional search will be twice that of single search, and the
algorithm will strictly follow this rule.

Real-world case
The excellent performance of the EBS-A� algorithm has been verified through simulation test-
ing. To verify the application potential of the algorithm in real scenarios, we select a mobile
robot as a real-world case to verify the effectiveness of the algorithm.
The hardware platform used in this experiment is the FS-AIROBOTB intelligent robot. The
hardware composition is shown in Fig 14, and the description of each component is shown in
Table 10.
To test the effectiveness of the EBS-A� algorithm, it is transplanted to the FS-AIROBOTB
mobile robot hardware platform in this paper. Given the open-source nature of the ROS and
the fact that the ROS contains the navigation function package “nav_ROS” for path planning,
the original algorithm of the function package is rewritten to realize the transplant of the algo-
rithm. This method can achieve the advantages of rapid development and tighter integration
with other components of the algorithm.

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 22 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

Fig 14. FS-AIROBOTB component diagram.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.g014

The start node and the end node are set in the real world. The robot uses the EBS-A� algo-
rithm to plan a collision-free path to the goal position. This experiment process consists of
three steps:
1. EBS-A� algorithm transplantation;
2. simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM) test;
3. a robot autonomous navigation test.
Algorithm transplantation accomplishes writing EBS-A� algorithm into the ROS. The
SLAM test built a test map to use the radar on the robot in the real world. The autonomous
navigation test verifies the effectiveness of the algorithm in the real world. This section intro-
duces the implementation of autonomous robot navigation experiments through algorithm
transplantation and map construction, to verify the effectiveness of EBS-A� algorithm in the
real world. The actual test environment and the map constructed by the SLAM are shown in
Fig 15.
As shown in Fig 16, the left picture is the rviz interface of the ROS navigation, and the right
picture is the extracted path. The result shows that the EBS-A� algorithm is feasible for the
ROS of the robot and that the planned path is smooth.

Table 10. FS-AIROBOTB component serial number comparison table.

Serial number Part name Serial number Part name
1 ROS omnidirectional vehicle chassis 9 FS_AIROBOTB
2 Mecanum wheel 10 7 inch HDMI display
3 Omnidirectional vehicle drive module 11 360 degree lidar
4 Cortex-M4 chassis core control board 12 Wireless bluetooth remote control handle
5 FS_Explore sensor board 13 Cortex-M3 robotic arm control board
6 1080P industrial module camera 14 4 array microphones
7 Grep 3S/25C/1300mA power lithium battery 15 3B+ Raspberry Pi
8 Six degrees of freedom robotic arm
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.t010

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 23 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

Fig 15. Actual test environment and the map constructed by SLAM.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.g015

In this experiment, we set an application environment for EBS-A� algorithm and carried
out the autonomous navigation test. The EBS-A� algorithm was written into a real mobile
robot. The experimental result shows that the robot can independently plan a reliable and
smooth path and complete the autonomous navigation from the starting node to the goal
node. This experiment verifies that the EBS-A� algorithm can be applied to mobile robots and
has the potential to be applied to industrial scenarios. To enable other researchers to reproduce

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 24 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

Fig 16. The rviz interface of path planning and extracted path.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841.g016

our experimental process, we share the source and instructions of this paper through the fol-
lowing Github link: https://github.com/wanghw1003/EBAStar.

Conclusions
In this paper, an improved path planning algorithm based on the conventional A� algorithm
for mobile robots, named the EBS-A� algorithm, is proposed. This algorithm employed the
three strategies of expansion distance, bidirectional search, and smoothing to overcome the
limitations of the conventional A� algorithm in terms of path robustness and path planning
efficiency. First, the expansion distance is set for the obstacles in the map to ensure that there
is a fault-tolerant distance between the path and the obstacles. Second, a bidirectional search is
added to the conventional A� algorithm to improve the speed of path planning. Third, the
right-angle turns are smoothed and optimized in the path. Experimental results show that the
EBS-A� algorithm improves the path planning efficiency by 278% and reduces the number of
critical nodes by 91.89% and the number of right-angle turns by 100%.

Author Contributions
Conceptualization: Wei Liu.
Formal analysis: Jing Jing.
Funding acquisition: Tieming Liu.
Methodology: Huanwei Wang.
Resources: Yisen Wang.
Validation: Shangjie Lou.
Writing – original draft: Huanwei Wang.
Writing – review & editing: Jing Jing, Wei Liu.

References
1. Kuanqi CAI, Chaoqun WANG, Jiyu CHENG, et al. Mobile Robot Path Planningin Dynamic Environ-
ments:A Survey. Instrumentation. 2019;v. 6(02):92–102.
2. Wang B, Liu Z, Li Q, Prorok A. Mobile Robot Path Planning in Dynamic Environments through Globally
Guided Reinforcement Learning. 2020;.

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 25 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

3. Costa MM, Silva MF. A survey on path planning algorithms for mobile robots. In: 2019 IEEE Interna-
tional Conference on Autonomous Robot Systems and Competitions (ICARSC). IEEE; 2019. p. 1–7.
4. Ab Wahab MN, Nefti-Meziani S, Atyabi A. A comparative review on mobile robot path planning: Classi-
cal or meta-heuristic methods? Annual Reviews in Control. 2020;.
5. Mandava RK, Bondada S, Vundavilli PR. An optimized path planning for the mobile robot using potential
field method and PSO algorithm. In: Soft Computing for Problem Solving. Springer; 2019. p. 139–150.
6. Nazarahari M, Khanmirza E, Doostie S. Multi-objective multi-robot path planning in continuous environ-
ment using an enhanced genetic algorithm. Expert Systems with Applications. 2019; 115:106–120.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2018.08.008
7. Elhoseny M, Tharwat A, Hassanien AE. Bezier curve based path planning in a dynamic field using modi-
fied genetic algorithm. Journal of Computational Science. 2018; 25:339–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jocs.2017.08.004
8. Ning J, Zhang Q, Zhang C, Zhang B. A best-path-updating information-guided ant colony optimization
algorithm. Information Sciences. 2018; 433:142–162.
9. Maheshwari P, Sharma AK, Verma K. Energy efficient cluster based routing protocol for WSN using but-
terfly optimization algorithm and ant colony optimization. Ad Hoc Networks. 2021; 110:102317. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.adhoc.2020.102317
10. Kumar PM, Manogaran G, Sundarasekar R, Chilamkurti N, Varatharajan R, et al. Ant colony optimiza-
tion algorithm with internet of vehicles for intelligent traffic control system. Computer Networks. 2018;
144:154–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2018.07.001
11. Hauer F, Tsiotras P. Deformable Rapidly-Exploring Random Trees. In: Robotics: Science and Systems;
2017.
12. Hirakawa T, Yamashita T, Fujiyoshi H. Scene Context-aware Rapidly-exploring Random Trees for
Global Path Planning. In: 2019 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communi-
cations Workshops (PerCom Workshops); 2019.
13. Hart PE, Nilsson NJ, Raphael B. A formal basis for the heuristic determination of minimum cost paths.
IEEE transactions on Systems Science and Cybernetics. 1968; 4(2):100–107. https://doi.org/10.1109/
TSSC.1968.300136
14. Sedighi S, Nguyen DV, Kuhnert KD. Guided Hybrid A-star Path Planning Algorithm for Valet Parking
Applications. In: 2019 5th International Conference on Control, Automation and Robotics (ICCAR);
2019.
15. Liu C, Mao Q, Chu X, Xie S. An improved A-star algorithm considering water current, traffic separation
and berthing for vessel path planning. Applied Sciences. 2019; 9(6):1057. https://doi.org/10.3390/
app9061057
16. Tang G, Tang C, Claramunt C, Hu X, Zhou P. Geometric A-Star Algorithm: An Improved A-Star Algo-
rithm for AGV Path Planning in a Port Environment. IEEE Access. 2021; 9:59196–59210. https://doi.
org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3070054
17. Karur K, Sharma N, Dharmatti C, Siegel JE. A Survey of Path Planning Algorithms for Mobile Robots.
Vehicles. 2021; 3(3):448–468. https://doi.org/10.3390/vehicles3030027
18. Dudi T, Singhal R, Kumar R. Shortest Path Evaluation with Enhanced Linear Graph and Dijkstra Algo-
rithm. In: 2020 59th Annual Conference of the Society of Instrument and Control Engineers of Japan
(SICE). IEEE; 2020. p. 451–456.
19. Liu Q, Zhao L, Tan Z, Chen W. Global path planning for autonomous vehicles in off-road environment
via an A-star algorithm. International Journal of Vehicle Autonomous Systems. 2017; 13(4):330–339.
https://doi.org/10.1504/IJVAS.2017.10008214
20. Wang ZQ, Hu XG, Li X X, Du ZQ. Overview of Global Path Planning Algorithms for Mobile Robots.
Computer Science; 48(10):19–29.
21. Singh Y, Sharma S, Sutton R, Hatton D, Khan A. A constrained A* approach towards optimal path plan-
ning for an unmanned surface vehicle in a maritime environment containing dynamic obstacles and
ocean currents. Ocean Engineering. 2018; 169:187–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.09.
016
22. Yang JM, Tseng CM, Tseng PS. Path planning on satellite images for unmanned surface vehicles.
International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering. 2015; 7(1):87–99. https://doi.org/
10.1515/ijnaoe-2015-0007
23. Yao J, Lin C, Xie X, Wang JA, Hung CC. [IEEE 2010 Seventh International Conference on Information
Technology: New Generations—Las Vegas, NV, USA (2010.04.12-2010.04.14)] 2010 Seventh Interna-
tional Conference on Information Technology: New Generations—Path Planning for Virtual Human
Motion U. 2010; p. 1154–1158.

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 26 / 27

PLOS ONE An improved A* algorithm for path planning

24. Qingji G, Yongsheng Y, Dandan H. feasible path search and optimization Based on an improved A*
algorithm. China Civil Aviation College Journal. 2005; 23(4):42–44.
25. Peng J, Huang Y, Luo G. Robot path planning based on improved A* algorithm. Cybernetics and Infor-
mation Technologies. 2015; 15(2):171–180. https://doi.org/10.1515/cait-2015-0036
26. Guruji AK, Agarwal H, Parsediya D. Time-efficient A* algorithm for robot path planning. Procedia Tech-
nology. 2016; 23:144–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.protcy.2016.03.010
27. Zhang X, Cheng C, Hao X, Jiansheng LI, Peng HU, University IE. A Path Planning Algorithm for Robots
Considering Both Global and Local Characteristics. Journal of Geomatics Science and Technology.
2018;.
28. Gunawan SA, Pratama GN, Cahyadi AI, Winduratna B, Yuwono YC, Wahyunggoro O. Smoothed A-
star Algorithm for Nonholonomic Mobile Robot Path Planning. In: 2019 International Conference on
Information and Communications Technology (ICOIACT). IEEE; 2019. p. 654–658.
29. Song R, Liu Y, Bucknall R. Smoothed A* algorithm for practical unmanned surface vehicle path plan-
ning. Applied Ocean Research. 2019; 83:9–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apor.2018.12.001
30. Fu B, Chen L, Zhou Y, Zheng D, Wei Z, Dai J, et al. An improved A* algorithm for the industrial robot
path planning with high success rate and short length. Robotics and Autonomous Systems. 2018;
106:26–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2018.04.007

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263841 February 17, 2022 27 / 27