MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010185804 · doi:10.2478/s13230-012-0014-3

Fuzzy Control of a Log Carrying Robot on Tree-Filled Steep-Sloping Terrains

2012· article· en· W2010185804 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

VenuePaladyn Journal of Behavioral Robotics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobotTerrainController (irrigation)Fuzzy logicControl theory (sociology)Computer sciencePosition (finance)Modular designFuzzy control systemArtificial intelligenceSimulationControl engineeringEngineeringControl (management)Geography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A modular robotic system and its fuzzy logic based controller are proposed for use in logging operations in forest environments with steep slopes. The Log-Carrying Robot (LCR) concept is composed of two modular wheeled robotic agents with individual wheel steering that connect to the ends of a log to a form a centrally controlled robot. A fuzzy controller specifies the desired direction of travel using four factors: the presence of obstacles, boundaries limiting the robot’s travel space, the heading of the goal position relative to the robot, and the slope of the terrain. The capabilities of the proposed controller are demonstrated in simulation using a rectangular robot with four individually actuated and steered wheels. Results indicate that the controller successfully steers the robot towards the goal position while avoiding obstacles using only eleven fuzzy rules. Additionally, the simple rules are shown to be effective at automatically compensating for sloped terrain by avoiding direct travel down hills, as well as adapting for various robot lengths.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.709
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.256 · 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