MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987168658 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2013.6567715

A relative mapping algorithm

2013· article· en· W1987168658 on OpenAlexaff
Jay Kraut

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlgorithmSimultaneous localization and mappingIterative closest pointComputationComputer scienceMatching (statistics)Kalman filterMap matchingPosition (finance)Difference-map algorithmBlossom algorithmPoint (geometry)Approximation algorithmMathematicsArtificial intelligenceMobile robotRobotPoint cloudGlobal Positioning System

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces a Relative Mapping Algorithm. This algorithm presents a new way of looking at the SLAM problem that does not use Probability, Iterative Closest Point, or Scan Matching techniques. A map of landmarks is generated by using the average relative location difference between landmarks. This means the algorithm does not use any known, estimated or predicted movement or position data. In addition, the Relative Mapping Algorithm has the capability to identify dynamic landmarks using a binning algorithm. The algorithm is shown to have a fast constant time O(nalogna) computation complexity where na is the average quantity of points that are visible. In limiting testing the accuracy of the Relative Mapping Algorithm is shown to be comparable to the Extended Kalman Filter.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.013

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.163 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationFrench-language works237,207