MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968398861 · doi:10.1142/s021812741002548x

A COOPERATIVE MOBILE ROBOT TASK ASSIGNMENT AND COVERAGE PLANNING BASED ON CHAOS SYNCHRONIZATION

2010· article· en· W1968398861 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

VenueInternational Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicChaos control and synchronization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMobile robotComputer scienceRobotWorkspaceSynchronizingSynchronization (alternating current)ChaoticControl theory (sociology)Motion planningTask (project management)Topology (electrical circuits)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsEngineeringControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we propose a cooperative task assignment and coverage planning for mobile robots based on chaos synchronization. The chaotic mobile robot implies that the robot controller that drives a chaotic motion is characterized by topological transitivity and sensitive dependence on initial conditions. Due to the topological transitivity, the chaotic mobile robot is guaranteed to scan a workspace completely and the robot requires neither a map of the workspace nor a global motion plan. Chen and Lorenz systems are used to generate chaotic motion in this work. Cooperative multirobot systems can operate faster with higher efficiency and better reliability than a single robot system. By synchronizing the chaotic robot controllers, effective cooperation can be achieved. The performance of the cooperative chaotic mobile robots can be attributed to the use of deterministic dynamical systems and extended Kalman filter for chaos synchronization. Computer simulations illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.713
Threshold uncertainty score0.412

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.245 · 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