MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1674276221 · doi:10.1109/icinfa.2015.7279550

The obstacle detection and obstacle avoidance algorithm based on 2-D lidar

2015· article· en· W1674276221 on OpenAlexaff
Yan Peng, Dong Qu, Yuxuan Zhong, Shaorong Xie, Jun Luo, Jason Gu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObstacle avoidanceObstacleMobile robotComputer scienceCollision avoidanceComputer visionLidarArtificial intelligenceCluster analysisPoint cloudRobotAlgorithmCollisionRemote sensingGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Obstacle avoidance ability is the significant embodiment of the ground mobile robot, and the basic guarantee of the ground mobile robot to perform various tasks. Obstacle avoidance technologies are divided into two kinds, one is based on the global map and another is based on sensors respectively. This paper mainly aims at the local obstacle avoidance method based on sensors. The study of obstacle detection and obstacle avoidance are two inseparable parts in the research of obstacle avoidance ability. This paper proposes an efficient obstacle detection and obstacle avoidance algorithm based on 2-D lidar. A method is proposed to get the information of obstacles by filtering and clustering the laser-point cloud data. Also, this method generates the forward angle and velocity of robot based on the principle of minimum cost function. The obstacle detection and obstacle avoidance algorithm has advantages of a simple mathematical model and good real-time performance. The effectiveness of the proposed algorithm is verified on MATLAB simulation platform.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations117
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207