MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1484555300 · doi:10.1002/rob.21490

Mapping, Planning, and Sample Detection Strategies for Autonomous Exploration

2013· article· en· W1484555300 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Field Robotics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSample (material)Computer scienceFidelityField (mathematics)RobotGlobal Positioning SystemSimultaneous localization and mappingObject detectionReal-time computingAutonomous robotObject (grammar)Artificial intelligenceHigh fidelityComputer visionMobile robotEngineeringPattern recognition (psychology)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper presents algorithmic advances and field trial results for autonomous exploration and proposes a solution to perform simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM), complete coverage, and object detection without relying on GPS or magnetometer data. We demonstrate an integrated approach to the exploration problem, and we make specific contributions in terms of mapping, planning, and sample detection strategies that run in real‐time on our custom platform. Field tests demonstrate reliable performance for each of these three main components of the system individually, and high‐fidelity simulation based on recorded data playback demonstrates the viability of the complete solution as applied to the 2013 NASA Sample Return Robot Challenge.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.923
Threshold uncertainty score0.248

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it