MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098519927 · doi:10.1109/tro.2006.870668

Modified Newton's method applied to potential field-based navigation for mobile robots

2006· article· en· W2098519927 on OpenAlexaff
Jing Ren, Kenneth McIsaac, Rajni V. Patel

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Robotics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGradient descentObstacleNewton's methodOscillation (cell signaling)Descent (aeronautics)Potential fieldMobile robotComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)Field (mathematics)Obstacle avoidanceRobotMathematical optimizationControl engineeringArtificial intelligenceMathematicsEngineeringAerospace engineeringControl (management)PhysicsArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the inherent oscillation problem of potential field methods (PFMs) in the presence of obstacles and in narrow passages. These problems can cause slow progress and system instability in implementation. To overcome these two problems, in this paper, we propose a modification of Newton's method. The use of the modified Newton's method, which applies anywhere C/sub 2/ continuous navigation functions are defined, greatly improves system performance when compared to the standard gradient descent approach. To the best of our knowledge, ours is the first systematic approach to the oscillation problems in PFMs. We have validated this technique by comparing its performance with the gradient descent method in obstacle-avoidance tasks with different potential models and parameter changes.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations128
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on RoboticsSame topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207