MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129626945 · doi:10.1109/iros.2008.4651183

RRT-SLAM for motion planning with motion and map uncertainty for robot exploration

2008· article· en· W2129626945 on OpenAlexaff
Yifeng Huang, Kamal Gupta

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMotion planningSimultaneous localization and mappingHolonomicRobotComputer scienceComputer visionTrajectoryArtificial intelligenceMotion (physics)Tree (set theory)Random treeTask (project management)Dimension (graph theory)Path (computing)Mobile robotMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We address the motion planning (MP) subproblem that arises in a robotic exploration and mapping task. We consider sensing, localization and mapping uncertainties in the motion planning subproblem. The robot is holonomic with known size and shape, and is equipped with a laser range sensor. We use a rapidly exploring randomized tree (RRT) in conjunction with a simulated particle based Simultaneous Localization and Mapping (SLAM) algorithm to expand the tree. The simulated SLAM explicitly accounts for sensor, localization and mapping uncertainty in the planning stage. Moreover, the RRT itself is represented in the augmented configuration space where an extra dimension of uncertainty is used. The collision likelihood along a planned path is explicitly computed and is used to select a planned path. Preliminary simulations show the effectiveness and benefits of our integrated approach.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations30
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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