MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036203342 · doi:10.1109/iros.2014.6942977

Integrating multiple soft constraints for planning practical paths

2014· article· en· W2036203342 on OpenAlexafffund
Jing Yang, Patrick Dymond, Michael Jenkin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceBiddingFlexibility (engineering)Motion planningRange (aeronautics)Mathematical optimizationSampling (signal processing)Domain (mathematical analysis)Adaptive samplingResource allocationArtificial intelligenceRobotEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sampling-based algorithms are a common approach to high-dimensional real-world path planning problems. Unfortunately the solutions found using such planners are often not practical in that they do not take into account soft application-specific constraints. This paper formulates the practicality of paths based on the notion of soft constraints found in the Planning Domain Definition Language 3 (PDDL3) (Gerevini and Long, 2005) and a range of optimization strategies are developed targeted towards user-preferred qualities by integrating soft constraints in the pre-processing, planning and post-processing phases of the sampling-based path planners. An auction-based resource allocation approach coordinates competing optimization strategies. This approach uses an adaptive bidding strategy for each optimizer and in each round the optimizer with the best predicted performance is selected. This general coordination system allows for flexibility in both the number and types of the optimizers used. Experimental validation demonstrates the effectiveness of the approach.

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)0.003
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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.493

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207