Time-optimal rendezvous planning for pick-and-place task sharing
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose a mode-sequential task sharing-for co-operating robot manipulators carrying out a pick-and-place task sharing in a common workspace. As the name implies, in this mode, each individual robot completes part of the same task. The first manipulator picks up the part(s) and directly passes it over to the second manipulator (like a baton being passed from one runner to the other in a relay race), which completes the task by placing the part at its desired goal location. The point at which the transition, i.e., passing over the part, occurs is the rendezvous point. We analyse this approach to minimize the total task time subject to dynamic constraints of the robots. A key step is to determine the optimal rendezvous point (ORP) that results in the optimal task time. We present an algorithm to determine the ORP and show that our approach results in a speed up by a factor of more than two over the conventional single manipulator case.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it