MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145012678

Planning 3D task demonstrations of a teleoperated space robot arm

2008· article· en· W2145012678 on OpenAlexaff
Froduald Kabanza, Khaled Belghith, Philipe Bellefeuille, Benjamin Auder, Leo Hartman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI-based Problem Solving and Planning
Canadian institutionsCanadian Space AgencyUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTask (project management)RobotTeleoperationTrajectoryRobotic armProgrammerMotion planningHuman–computer interactionArtificial intelligenceComputer visionSimulationEngineeringEmbedded system
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an automated planning application for generating 3D tasks demonstrations involving a teleoperated robot arm on the International Space Station (ISS). A typical task demonstration involves moving the robot arm from one configuration to another. Our objective is to automatically plan the position of virtual cameras to film the arm in a manner that conveys the best awareness of the robot trajectory to the user. Given a new task, or given changes to a task previously planned, our system automatically and efficiently generates 3D demonstrations of the task without the intervention of a computer graphics programmer. For a given task, the robot trajectory is generated using a path planner. Then we consider the filming of the trajectory as a sequence of shots satisfying some temporally extended goal conveying constraints on the desirable positioning of virtual cameras. Then a temporallogic based planning system (TLPlan) is used to generate a 3D movie satisfying the goal. One motivation for this application is to eventually use it to support ground operators in planning mission tasks for the ISS. Another motivation is to eventually use automatically generated demonstrations in a 3D training simulator to provide feedback to student astronauts learning to manipulate the robot arm. Although motivated by the ISS application, the key ideas underlying our system are potentially useful for automatically filming other kinds of complex animated scenes.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.214 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAI-based Problem Solving and PlanningFrench-language works237,207