INFLUENCE OF TEMPERATURE ON SWARMBOTS THAT LEARN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The problem considered in this article is how a cybernetic system can learn to control its actions in a hostile environment. This article focuses on an approach to solving this problem in an environment with varying temperatures. In effect, machines that operate outdoors have higher survivability if actions are chosen during periods when it is cooler (e.g., night-time or early morning rather than mid- to late afternoon during summer months). The assumption made here is that learning to choose actions that compensate for the influence of temperature has beneficial influence on the functioning of individuals in robot societies (collections of cooperating robots called swarmbots or swarms). In keeping with this idea, a biologically-inspired form of adaptive learning is given in this article. Conventional actor-critic learning provides a framework for the control strategy introduced in this article. It is ethology (study of behavior of organisms) that provides a basis for monitoring the behavior of a swarmbot. Individual behaviours together with sensor measurements are recorded in tables called ethograms. Swarm behavior tends to be episodic. An ethogram is recorded during each episode during the lifespan of a swarm. Each ethogram is a source of measurements that can be used to influence learning during an episode. The contribution of this article is the introduction of a biologically-inspired approach to learning that adapts to changing temperatures.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".