MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059370927 · doi:10.1117/12.474436

<title>Robotic concepts for urban operations</title>

2002· article· en· W2059370927 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bruce L. Digney, Steven G. Penzes

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerrainRobotMorphingComputer scienceFunction (biology)RoboticsMobile robotPerceptionHuman–computer interactionArtificial intelligenceSimulationComputer securityGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While land vehicles in open terrains is currently the primary military operation, it is expected that an increasing number of conflicts will occur in urban setting. Urban robots must operate under mobility, communication, perception and control conditions far more demanding than their open terrain counterparts. The Defense Research Establishment Suffield (DRES) is being tasked to develop robots, unmanned vehicles and supports system to aid the Canadian Forces in urban operations. In preparation for this role DRES personnel were invited to participate in operation Urban Ram, a large urban war game held on the grounds of CFB Griesbach in Edmonton. This paper presents the lessons learned at Urban Ram as to what roles robots could fulfill and the challenges of urban environments that must be overcome. Also presented will be robotic concepts inspired by Urban Ram, specifically discussed will be High Utility Robotics (HUR), which combines geometric shape shifting with function morphing to provide the general purpose, high mobility and broad application robots required for urban environments.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score0.603

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1800.081

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations10
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207