MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1590315623 · doi:10.1109/icra.2015.7139637

Learning to assess terrain from human demonstration using an introspective Gaussian-process classifier

2015· article· en· W1590315623 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGaussian Processes and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Christian StudiesUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerrainArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceClassifier (UML)RobotGaussian processMachine learningGaussianComputer visionPattern recognition (psychology)Geography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an approach to learning robot terrain assessment from human demonstration. An operator drives a robot for a short period of time, supervising the gathering of traversable and untraversable terrain data. After this initial training period, the robot can then predict the traversability of new terrain based on its experiences. We improve on current methods in two ways: first, we maintain a richer (higher-dimensional) representation of the terrain that is better able to distinguish between different training examples. Second, we use a Gaussian-process classifier for terrain assessment due to its superior introspective abilities (leading to better uncertainty estimates) when compared to other classifier methods in the literature. Our method is tested on real data and shown to outperform current methods both in classification accuracy and uncertainty estimation.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.686
Threshold uncertainty score0.793

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGaussian Processes and Bayesian InferenceFrench-language works237,207