Multi-robot exploration and rendezvous on graphs
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We address the problem of arranging a meeting (or rendezvous) between two or more robots in an unknown bounded topological environment, starting at unknown locations, without any communication. The goal is to rendezvous in minimum time such that the robots can share resources for performing any global task. We specifically consider a global exploration task executed by two or more robots. Each robot explores the environment simultaneously, for a specified time, then selects potential rendezvous locations, where it expects to find other robots, and visits them. We propose a ranking criterion for selecting the order in which potential rendezvous locations will be visited. This ranking criterion associates a cost for visiting a rendezvous location and gives an expected reward of finding other agents. We evaluate the time taken to rendezvous by varying a set of conditions including: world size, number of robots, starting location of each robot and the presence of sensor noise. We present simulation results to quantify the effect of the aforementioned factors on the rendezvous time.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it