MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1519987888 · doi:10.1109/robot.2003.1241566

A neural network based torque controller for collision-free navigation of mobile robots

2004· article· en· W1519987888 on OpenAlexaff
Simon X. Yang, Tiemin Hu, Xiaobu Yuan, Peter Liu, Max Q.‐H. Meng

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of WindsorUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMobile robotRobotArtificial neural networkTorqueController (irrigation)Computer scienceControl theory (sociology)Nonholonomic systemRobot controlCollisionLyapunov stabilityControl engineeringLyapunov functionEngineeringArtificial intelligenceControl (management)Nonlinear system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a neural network based torque controller is proposed for real-time collision-free navigation of nonholonomic mobile robots. A torque resulted from the obstacles is incorporated in the control design based on the artificial potential technique, which locally pushes the robot away from the obstacles to avoid collisions. All the needed environment information can be obtained from on-board robot sensors that have limited visibility range only. A torque from a simply single-layer neural network is employed to learn the completely unknown robot dynamics. The system stability is guaranteed by a Lyapunov stability theory. The real-time fine control of mobile robots is achieved through the on-line learning of the neural network. The effectiveness of the proposed controller is demonstrated by simulation studies in both static and dynamic environments.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations10
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207