MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1765773545 · doi:10.1109/imtc.1997.604019

Translation of task-level instructions to sensing/actuation skills by a robotic assembling agent

2002· article· en· W1765773545 on OpenAlexafffund
J.S. Basran, Emil M. Petriu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobot Manipulation and Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInstituto de Telecomunicações
KeywordsComputer scienceTask (project management)ExecutableContext (archaeology)RobotHuman–computer interactionField (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceProgramming languageEngineeringSystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a robotic assembling agent that translates task-level, assembly operation, instructions into a sequence of executable skills. We adopt the concept of an agent from the field of multi-agent systems and the concept of a task-level instruction from the field of robot programming. A skill is a parameterized, sensing and/or actuation, action that a robot can accomplish repeatably. We present our approach to this translation problem within the larger context of an agent-based robotic assembly cell (AGRA) and in relation to the proof of concept implementation of an actual, robotic assembling agent. In particular, we discuss the translation of a basic peg in hole, task-level instruction that uses a range sensor and a force/torque sensor into a sequence of skills.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobot Manipulation and LearningFrench-language works237,207