MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113454633 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2005.1557016

A proposal for self-recognition in robot programming

2006· article· en· W2113454633 on OpenAlexaff
Kamran Karimi, Mehran Mehrandezh, Howard J. Hamilton

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobotComputer scienceProcess (computing)Artificial intelligenceA priori and a posterioriPersonal robotCode (set theory)Human–computer interactionRobot controlSocial robotMobile robotComputer visionSet (abstract data type)Programming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we propose a way to perform robotic self-recognition in static and quasi-static environments, self-recognition is a process during which the robot discovers the effects of its own actions on the environment and itself. For example, how much would the robot move when its wheels turn once? Such information can be hard-coded into the robot's code, but it can also be discovered automatically, self-recognition can be used when the robot or the environment are unknown a priori or change. Examples are when new wheels or a completely new robot is used, or when obstacles are added to the environment. Instead of re-programming, the user can let the robot "play" and discover how to change its situation. In this way only the self-recognition phase should be repeated, while the high level planning strategy can remain the same

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207