Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Mobile Robots, Perception & Navigation vision will also mean that there will be significant redundancy in processing across a team of robots in many applications as well. Local vision may also be undesirable in applications where a large number of very simple robots may be able to do the job of a few complex robots, in environments where shared vision is amenable (that is, where a unique perspective for each individual is unnecessary), and in educational environments where it is desirable to separate the problems of computer vision from the rest of robotics. In these domains, the second form of vision, global vision, is often preferred. Global vision provides a single third-party view to all members of a robot team, analogous to the view of a commentator in a soccer game. Global vision shares many of the problems associated with local vision. Objects of interest must be identified and tracked, which requires dealing with changes in appearance due to lighting variation and perspective. Since objects may not be identifiable in every frame, tracking objects across different frames is often necessary even if the objects are not mobile. The problem of identifying objects that are juxtaposed being viewed as one larger object rather than several distinct objects, and other problems related to the placement and motion of objects in the environment, are also common. In domains such as robotic soccer, where pragmatic real-time global vision is large part of the application, many of the more difficult problems associated with global vision have been dealt with through the introduction of artificial assumptions that greatly simplify the situation. The cost of such assumptions is that of generality: such systems can only operate where the assumptions they rely upon can be made. For example, global vision systems for robotic soccer (e.g. If a camera cannot be placed perfectly overhead, these systems cannot be used. Such systems also typically recognize individuals by arrangements of coloured patches, where the colours (for the patches and other items such as the ball) must be pre-defined, necessitating constant camera recalibration as lighting changes. Such systems can thus only operate in environments where lighting remains relatively consistent. While such systems will always be applicable in narrow domains where these assumptions can be made to hold, the generality lost in continuing to adhere to these assumptions serves to limit the applicability of these approaches to harder problems. Moreover, these systems bear little resemblance to human vision: children playing with remote-controlled devices, for example, do not have to climb to the ceiling and look down from overhead. Similarly, human vision does not require significant restrictions lighting consistency, nor any specialized markings on objects to be tracked. In order to advance the state of the art in robotics and artificial intelligence, we must begin to make such systems more generally intelligent. The most obvious first steps in this direction are considering the assumptions necessary to make a global vision system operate, and then to find ways of removing these. O u r a p p r o a c h t o r e a l t i m e c o m p u t e r v i s i o n a r i s e s f r o m a d e s i r e t o r e m o v e t h e s e assumptions and produce a more intelligent approach to global vision for teams of robots, not only for the sake of technological advancement, but from a pragmatic standpoint as well. For example, a system that does not assume that a camera has a perfect overhead mount is not only more generally useful, but requires less set-up time in that a perfect overhead mount does not need to be made. Similarly, an approach that can function in a wide range of lighting conditions saves the time and expense of providing specialized
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».