MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159683855 · doi:10.1109/robot.2005.1570827

Learning to Steer on Winding Tracks Using Semi-Parametric Control Policies

2006· article· en· W2159683855 on OpenAlexaff
K. Alton, Michiel van de Panne

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVoronoi diagramParametric statisticsNonholonomic systemRepresentation (politics)Computer scienceControl (management)Set (abstract data type)TruckNode (physics)Reinforcement learningState spaceVehicle dynamicsControl theory (sociology)State (computer science)Space (punctuation)Artificial intelligenceMobile robotEngineeringRobotMathematicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a semi-parametric control policy representation and use it to solve a series of nonholonomic control problems with input state spaces of up to 7 dimensions. A nearest-neighbor control policy is represented by a set of nodes that induce a Voronoi partitioning of the input space. The Voronoi cells then define local control actions. Direct policy search is applied to optimize the node locations and actions. The selective addition of nodes allows for progressive refinement of the control representation. We demonstrate this approach on the challenging problem of learning to steer cars and trucks-with-trailers around winding tracks with sharp corners. We consider the steering of both forwards and backwards-moving vehicles with only local sensory information. The steering behaviors for these nonholonomic systems are shown to generalize well to tracks not seen in training.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.249 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207