MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143567544 · doi:10.1109/icma.2005.1626631

A neural network based intelligent planner for the coordinated hybrid agent framework

2006· article· en· W2143567544 on OpenAlexaff
H. Li, Fakhri Karray, Otman Basir, Insop Song

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlannerComputer scienceArtificial neural networkMulti-agent systemRobotPlan (archaeology)Artificial intelligenceIntelligent agentDistributed computingMobile robot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, a coordinated hybrid agent (CHA) framework was proposed for the control of multiagent systems (MASs). In the past few years, it has been applied to both homogeneous and heterogeneous multi-agent systems. In previous studies, the coordination among agents were implemented based on the designer's knowledge of the system. For large complex systems, it would be desirable if we can plan the coordination among agents dynamically. In this study, we demonstrate that an intelligent planner can be designed for the CHA framework to automatically generate desired actions for multiple robots in a multiagent system. The proposed intelligent planner is based on the construction of a biologically inspired neural network. The dynamics of each neuron in the topologically organized neural network is characterized by a shunting neural equation. A landscape of the neural activities for all neurons of a CHA agent contains information about the agent's local goal, permanent obstacles and temporary obstacles. Each agent treats other robots as moving obstacles. The objective for building the intelligent planner is to plan actions for multiple mobile robots to coordinate with others and to achieve the global goal while each agent achieves its local goal. Simulation results show that in order to control a large complex system, an intelligent planner can be designed for the CHA framework so that coordination among agents can be achieved.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.362
Threshold uncertainty score0.512

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207