History checking of temporal fuzzy logic formulas for monitoring behavior-based mobile robots
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Behavior-based robot control systems have shown remarkable success for controlling robots evolving in real world environments. However, they can fail in different manners due to their distributed control and their local decision making. In this case, monitoring can be used to detect failures and help to recover from them. In this work, we present an approach for specifying monitoring knowledge and a method for using this knowledge to detect failures. In particular we show how temporal fuzzy logic can be used to represent monitoring knowledge and then utilized to effectively detect runtime failures. New semantics are introduced to take into consideration uncertainty and noisy information. There are numbers of advantages to our approach including a declarative semantics for the monitoring knowledge and an independence of this knowledge from the implementation details of the control system. Moreover we show how our system can deal effectively with noisy information and sensor readings. Experiments with two real world robots and the simulator are used to illustrate failure examples and the benefits of failure detection and noise elimination.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it