Talk:Rapidly exploring random tree

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

First version

I was in a bit of a rush putting this article together, and therefore the text in the introduction is more or less copied from the [page]. Not only does the article need to be expanded, but this paragraph needs some rewriting. — Stimpy_talk 16:52, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear about algorithm

What is the motivation of using NEW_CONF(qnear, Δq) as opposed to qnear?
'"←" is a loose shorthand for "changes to".' how is it loose? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.201.44.249 (talk) 16:26, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I felt bold and deleted the word "loose" from the {{algorithm-end}} template a few moments ago. — Pt _(T) 20:29, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Revision

I'm going to make an effort to clean up this article so I can add a mention of the optimal variant of RRT, RRT*, that has become quite popular in robotics. — Nutshell1524 (talk) 15:31, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mud Cracks

Shoud insert a link to crack models as the patterns are essentially the same. 77.13.248.157 (talk) 06:17, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. RRT is a classic and well recognized methods with extensive analysis. The similarity of the patterns is pretty obscure and of questionable relevance. 69.157.145.104 (talk) 02:11, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]