MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144808565 · doi:10.1109/isic.2004.1387684

Natural language interface for mobile robot navigation control

2005· article· en· W2144808565 on OpenAlexaff
Insop Song, Federico Guedea-Elizalde, Fakhri Karray, Yanqin Dai, Iqra Khalil

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Automated Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSoftware portabilityCommon Object Request Broker ArchitectureMobile robotMiddleware (distributed applications)RobotInterface (matter)Natural languageMobile robot navigationNatural language user interfaceRobot controlHuman–computer interactionEmbedded systemArtificial intelligenceProgramming languageDistributed computingOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Natural language command is very abstract. On the other hand, a mobile robot command should be very specific with actual numbers. Thus natural language processing and robot navigation has a big gap. In our research, we fill the gap integrating separately built natural language system and navigation system. We connect them by middleware standard to improve portability and efficiency. We use CORBA, and utilize normal request/reply blocking type communication as well as push type nonblocking communication for such as emergency stop. For experiment, we command to robot with natural language, such as "will you please go to the door" and robot replied using text-to-speech engine as "I am moving to the door...I am at the door." We also quickly extend the system to control a manipulator robot; this shows that our research work is reusable and portable.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.007

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations7
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotics and Automated SystemsFrench-language works237,207