MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147007189 · doi:10.1109/rose.2011.6058534

Immersive virtual environment for mobile platform remote operation and exploration

2011· article· en· W2147007189 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan Fournier, Marielle Mokhtari, Benoît Ricard

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInteractive and Immersive Displays
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSituation awarenessComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionAvatarRobotTeleoperationVirtual machineEngineeringArtificial intelligenceOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

These days, robotic platforms are commonly used in operational conditions where manned operations are not practical, not cost-effective or too dangerous. Those robotic devices rely heavily on remote operations using imagery acquired by on-board sensors that provide quite limited situational awareness to the user. In difficult scenarios, this lack of good situational awareness could lead to the failure of the mission. This paper presents a new concept currently in development that will improve situational awareness of the remote platform operator through an immersive virtual environment. The system uses an immersive chamber (CAVE) in which the operator is able to visualize and interact with an avatar of a robot evolving in a 3D model of its area of operation. The 3D model is incrementally built from the remote platform sensor feeds and provides “persistent data” to the user. This paper presents the first phase of the work which involves the development of a concept demonstration prototype. The implementation uses a robot simulator instead of a real world robot in order to rapidly be able to evaluate the concept and perform experiments. The tools developed in simulation will serve as the base for further developments and support the transition to a real robotic platform.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

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 communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInteractive and Immersive DisplaysFrench-language works237,207