MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1542367368 · doi:10.1109/icra.2015.7139606

Fractal trajectories for online non-uniform aerial coverage

2015· article· en· W1542367368 on OpenAlexafffund
Seyed Abbas Sadat, Jens Wawerla, Richard Vaughan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceMotion planningTrajectoryTerrainSampling (signal processing)FractalTask (project management)Path (computing)RobotComputer visionArtificial intelligenceReal-time computingMathematicsGeographyEngineeringCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a novel method for non-uniform terrain coverage using Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). The existing methods for coverage path planning consider a uniformly interesting target area and hence all the regions are covered with high resolution. However in many real world applications items of interest are not uniformly distributed but form patches of locally high interest. Therefore, with sparse sampling of uninteresting sections of the environment and high resolution sampling of interesting patches, the trajectory of the robot can become shorter. In this paper, we present a novel coverage strategy based on Space-Filling Curves that can accomplish non-uniform coverage of regions in the target area. Simulations and real robot experiments indicate that with the new strategy, travel time / cost of the task can be (almost) always less than a regular ‘lawnmower’ coverage pattern.

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)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.248 · 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
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

Citations61
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207