Bibliographic record
Abstract
Collision avoidance is a fundamental requirement for mobile robots. Avoiding moving obstacles (also termed dynamic obstacles) with unpredictable direction changes, such as humans, is more challenging than avoiding moving obstacles whose motion can be predicted. Precise information on the future moving directions of humans is unobtainable for use in navigation algorithms. Furthermore, humans should be able to pursue their activities unhindered and without worrying about the robots around them. In this paper, both active and critical regions are used to deal with the uncertainty of human motion. A procedure is introduced to calculate the region sizes based on worst-case avoidance conditions. Next, a novel virtual force field-based mobile robot navigation algorithm (termed QVFF) is presented. This algorithm may be used with both holonomic and nonholonomic robots. It incorporates improved virtual force functions for avoiding moving obstacles and its stability is proven using a piecewise continuous Lyapunov function. Simulation and experimental results are provided for a human walking towards the robot and blocking the path to a goal location. Next, the proposed algorithm is compared with five state-of-the-art navigation algorithms for an environment with one human walking with an unpredictable change in direction. Finally, avoidance results are presented for an environment containing three walking humans. The QVFF algorithm consistently generated collision-free paths to the goal.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".