MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095846163 · doi:10.1109/ijcnn.2009.5178773

Speed control of a mobile robot using neural networks and fuzzy logic

2009· article· en· W2095846163 on OpenAlexaff
Moufid Harb, Rami Abielmona, Emil M. Petriu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMobile robotArtificial neural networkComputer scienceFuzzy logicMotion planningFuzzy control systemArtificial intelligenceMobile robot navigationRobotControl systemControl engineeringComputational intelligencePath (computing)Robot controlEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When a certain control function is hard to achieve using a single intelligence technique, collaboration between different ones may succeed in performing such a complicated mission. This paper shows a mobile robot playing a significant role in a clean-room medical factory, where it is not recommended for the human to work. In that environment, neural networks and fuzzy logic were combined to form a suitable solution to perform the dedicated missions. In order to perform the speed control of a mobile robot, multi-layered neural networks designed for environmental recognition, and local navigation feed the fuzzy system with signals of change in direction with the nature of the sub-space of the working environment. To prove this concept, a computer based design and test of the computational intelligence system is performed. This system includes three neural controllers for local navigation, two neural networks for environmental recognition, and a fuzzy system for speed control. The system is fed off-line by a simulated model of a laser range-finder. These major components of the control system perform a global neural navigation and a fuzzy-neural speed control that guide a mobile robot to track its predefined path to arrive to its final goal through a set of sub-goals, or autonomously plan its path to arrive to the desired final goal, while avoiding obstacles that are found along the way.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.242 · 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
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

Citations8
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207