MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156373593 · doi:10.1109/tsmcb.2006.877792

Rendezvous-Guidance Trajectory Planning for Robotic Dynamic Obstacle Avoidance and Interception

2006· letter· en· W2156373593 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part B (Cybernetics) · 2006
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRendezvousInterceptionObstacle avoidanceObstacleCollision avoidanceComputer scienceTrajectoryPosition (finance)RobotMotion planningControl theory (sociology)Path (computing)SimulationArtificial intelligenceCollisionMobile robotEngineeringControl (management)Aerospace engineeringGeographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This correspondence presents a novel online trajectory-planning method for the autonomous robotic interception of moving targets in the presence of dynamic obstacles, i.e., position and velocity matching (also referred to as rendezvous). The proposed time-optimal interception method is a hybrid algorithm that augments a novel rendezvous-guidance (RG) technique with the velocity-obstacle approach, for obstacle avoidance, first reported by Fiorini and Shiller. The obstacle-avoidance algorithm itself could not be used in its original form and had to be modified to ensure that the online planned path deviates minimally from the one generated by the RG algorithm. Extensive simulation and experimental analyses, some of which are reported in this correspondence, have clearly demonstrated the tangible time efficiency of the proposed interception method.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.871
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.227 · 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