MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974663537 · doi:10.1109/acc.2010.5530618

Leader follower based formation control strategies for nonholonomic mobile robots: Design, implementation and experimental validation

2010· article· en· W1974663537 on OpenAlexaff
Gayan W. Gamage, George K. I. Mann, Raymond G. Gosine

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicControl and Dynamics of Mobile Robots
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNonholonomic systemMobile robotTrajectoryControl theory (sociology)LinearizationControl engineeringRobotFeedback linearizationComputer scienceController (irrigation)Stability (learning theory)EngineeringControl (management)Artificial intelligenceNonlinear system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes novel formation maintenance strategies for multiple nonholonomic mobile robots based on nonholonomic trajectory tracking techniques and dynamic feedback linearization. It also presents experimental results for formation stability and noise tolerance of the proposed and existing leader-follower based controllers using physical P3AT robots. The research focusses only on the problem of formation maintenance by multiple nonholonomic mobile robots. Two types of formation maintenance controllers are developed by transforming the follower robot's motion in to separate trajectory tracking tasks and then by applying existing nonholonomic trajectory tracking techniques. A third controller is developed through the use of dynamic feedback linearization. The proposed systems are implemented in physical P3AT type mobile robots and real-world experimental results are shown to compare the formation accuracy and the stability of these controllers.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.258
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 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

Citations24
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicControl and Dynamics of Mobile RobotsFrench-language works237,207