Three‐dimensional SLAM for mapping planetary work site environments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, we present a robust framework suitable for conducting three‐dimensional simultaneous localization and mapping (3D SLAM) in a planetary work site environment. Operation in a planetary environment imposes sensing restrictions, as well as challenges due to the rugged terrain. Utilizing a laser rangefinder mounted on a rover platform, we have demonstrated an approach that is able to create globally consistent maps of natural, unstructured 3D terrain. The framework presented in this paper utilizes a sparse‐feature‐based approach and conducts data association using a combination of feature constellations and dense data. Because of feature scarcity, odometry measurements are also incorporated to provide additional information in feature‐poor regions. To maintain global consistency, these measurements are resolved using a batch alignment algorithm, which is reinforced with heterogeneous outlier rejection to improve its robustness to outliers in either measurement type (i.e., laser or odometry). Finally, a map is created from the alignment estimates and the dense data. Extensive validation of the framework is provided using data gathered at two different planetary analogue facilities, which consist of 50 and 102 3D scans, respectively. At these sites, root‐mean‐squared mapping errors of 4.3 and 8.9 cm were achieved. Relative metrics are utilized for localization accuracy and map quality, which facilitate detailed analysis of the performance, including failure modes and possible future improvements. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".