MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128677896 · doi:10.1109/robot.2001.933198

Map building for a terrain scanning robot

2002· article· en· W2128677896 on OpenAlexaff
Homayoun Najjaran, Nenad Kircanski, A.A. Goldenberg

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer visionTerrainArtificial intelligenceRobotComputer scienceMobile robotMotion planningObstacleObstacle avoidanceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Presents the application of an image registration method for a mobile manipulator. The robot is used for scanning natural terrain and detecting metal objects hidden beneath the terrain surface (e.g., landmines) using a metal detector. The range image may be interpreted for visual servoing, map building and path planning, or object recognition. In the work, the image is used to build a terrain map for obstacle free path planning. Because the working area of the robot is extremely dynamic (i.e., not only the robot travels but also the environment is also subject to change) an active range sensing method is selected to provide the range image. The range values are acquired using a laser range finder with a rotating mirror for scanning so that sensor fusion in the form of collecting sensor readings over an extended period of time is required. In addition, range readings of two ultrasonic range finders are fused at signal level to tackle both sensor imperfection and environmental illumination that induce uncertainty at the system. We explain the use of a real-time programming platform that executes an online map-building process in parallel for robot manipulation and control.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.004

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.198 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationFrench-language works237,207