MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021253355 · doi:10.1142/s0219878910002142

TERRAIN ROUGHNESS ASSESSMENT FOR HIGH SPEED UGV NAVIGATION IN UNKNOWN HETEROGENEOUS TERRAINS

2010· article· en· W2021253355 on OpenAlexaff
A. S. El-Kabbany, Alejandro Ramirez‐Serrano

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Information Acquisition · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerrainComputer scienceTraverseUnmanned ground vehicleRange (aeronautics)Navigation systemStandard deviationSimulationReal-time computingComputer visionArtificial intelligenceAerospace engineeringGeodesyGeologyEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses the problem of determining the maximum allowable speed (V) of a vehicle traversing unknown off-road terrains. The calculated maximum speed achieves the fastest navigation without exceeding an allowable range of transmitted force (Fall) to the vehicle's frame. The proposed system enables the vehicle to transit between different terrains safely. The system's input are: (i) a 3D range image of the terrain and (ii) the vehicle's dimensions and characteristics (e.g., suspension parameters). First the terrain roughness is assessed; then the corresponding maximum allowable speed is calculated. In this paper a novel Roughness Index (RI) is used to represent the terrain roughness. This index is calculated based on the standard deviation of the terrain points' elevations (3D range image). A closed form expression of the maximum allowable vehicle speed is developed (as function of the vehicle's properties, Fall, RI, and probability of not exceeding Fall). The proposed system can be used as a driver assistant system to enhance the vehicle performance, increase its life time, and reduce the maintenance cost. In addition, it is a key module in Unmanned Ground Vehicles (UGVs) navigation systems; as it provides the navigation system with necessary information for path and speed planning.

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 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 categoriesnone
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 score0.620
Threshold uncertainty score0.533

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Information AcquisitionSame topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207