MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1488215615 · doi:10.1109/mercon.2015.7112329

An efficient distributed data correspondence scheme for multi-robot relative localization

2015· article· en· W1488215615 on OpenAlexaff
Oscar De Silva, George K. I. Mann, Raymond G. Gosine

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobotInitializationComputer scienceUnavailabilityClutterArtificial intelligenceComputer visionSensor fusionMobile robotData associationRadarEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research addresses the problem of relative localization within a robot network possessing relative measurements between robots. The problem of correspondence is inherent to most multi-robot relative sensing methods, such as LiDAR, RADAR and vision based solutions. Multi-sensor multi-target tracking approaches addresses the problem of correspondence, when good prioris for initial poses of the sensing platforms are assumed. However the multi-robot relative localization problem differs from the classical multi-target tracking scenario due to; a) the unavailability of initial poses of sensing platforms, b) the existence of mutual measurements between the sensing platforms, and c) the measurement set being mixed with both known and unknown correspondences. To address these specific characteristics of multi-robot systems, this study proposes a distributed data correspondence architecture which performs multi-hypothesis estimation of the robot states. The proposed architecture is implemented on a multi-robot relative sensor configuration which possess range measurements with known data correspondence and bearing measurements with unknown data correspondence. The proposed distributed multi-robot localization method is capable of addressing measurement correspondence, noise, and measurement clutter effectively, while possessing inherent initialization and recovery capability from unknown poses.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.001
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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.267
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.172
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207