MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130280189 · doi:10.1109/robot.1992.220295

Real-time multi-robot path planner based on a heuristic approach

2003· article· en· W2130280189 on OpenAlexaff
Henry K. Chu, H.A. ElMaraghy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobotComputer scienceHeuristicPath (computing)TrajectoryMotion planningRobot controlReal-time computingArm solutionCollisionSimulationCartesian coordinate robotArtificial intelligenceMobile robotOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors describe a real-time approach to solve the trajectory planning problem using the latest feedback of robot joint locations from robot controllers. The approach incorporates an efficient collision avoidance strategy to allow decisions to be made during execution by means of cylindrical robot link approximation. The developed algorithm has been verified with a dual-robot planning and control system for the mechanical assembly of a dish-washer power unit. The system consists of an ADEPTI and a PUMA 560 industrial robot running under the control of a Sun-4 Sparc 2 workstation at the high control level. A coarse motion planner is available to prevent the arm from colliding with stationary objects. In this dual-arm system, a task level multi-agent plan is generated to specify the logical sequence of assembly. From the execution results, it was found that even when the robot speed was varied from 25% to 80% of its full capacity, a collision-free path was found for each robot.>

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)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations28
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207