Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider the problem of exploring an unknown environment with a pair of mobile robots. The goal is to make the robots meet (or rendezvous) in minimum time such that there is a maximum speed gain of the exploration task. The key challenge in achieving this goal is to rendezvous with the least possible dependency on communication. This single constraint involves several sub-problems: finding unique potential rendezvous locations in the environment, ranking these locations based on their uniqueness and synchronizing with the other robot to meet at one of the locations at a scheduled time. In addition, these tasks are to be performed simultaneously while exploring and mapping the environment. We propose an approach for efficiently combining the exploration and rendezvous tasks by considering the cost of reaching a rendezvous location and the reward of its uniqueness. This cost and reward model is combined with a set of deterministic and probabilistic rendezvous strategies for the robots to meet during exploration. Experimental results suggest that the joint tasks of exploration and rendezvous are substantially improved by ranking the potential rendezvous locations based on the combined cost-reward criterion when compared to the ranking solely based on the uniqueness of the location.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".