MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032166099 · doi:10.1109/rose.2007.4373960

Vision-based Exploration Algorithms for Rough Terrain Modeling Using Triangular Mesh Maps

2007· article· en· W2032166099 on OpenAlexaff
L. Liu, T.G. Crowe, Martin Roberge, Joseph Nsasi Bakambu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsBrampton Civic HospitalUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerrainComputer scienceBoundary (topology)Computer visionAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMobile robotMotion planningElevation (ballistics)Triangle meshFunction (biology)Stage (stratigraphy)RobotComputer graphics (images)MathematicsGeologyGeometryPolygon meshGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is to develop a new exploratory approach based on a triangular mesh map for automatic modeling of a large rough agricultural environment. A triangular mesh map was used to represent the agricultural field surface because of its ability to represent large rough areas efficiently. A terrain map is built incrementally during exploration, using 3D image sensor readings. A 3D image sensor model, with attributes similar to a camera or laser sensor, was used in the simulation. A two-stage exploring policy was used to plan the next-best view by considering both the distance and elevation change in the cost function. In the first stage of exploration, the robot travels to the outer boundary between the explored and unexplored terrain, while in the second stage it fills in the hole left by the first stage. Previous work considered distance as the only traveling cost. In this work, the slope factor is also included in the cost function because the mobile robot needs more energy to overcome the changes in elevation. A line sweeping approach based on the bug concept is also presented to identify a path for complete coverage of the terrain. The two methods are implemented and validated in simulation. A complete comparison of the traveling distance, time consumption, and number of scans recorded using the two methods is presented to show the effectiveness of the two-stage exploration algorithm.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.833

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.252 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207