MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162666142 · doi:10.1109/robot.1996.506178

The use of perceptual cues in multi-robot box-pushing

2002· article· en· W2162666142 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicModular Robots and Swarm Intelligence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobotComputer sciencePerceptionMobile robotFinite-state machineTask (project management)Artificial intelligenceRoboticsAutomatonSet (abstract data type)Human–computer interactionAlgorithmEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we present an approach to controlling transitions in multirobot tasks which have been modelled as a linear series of steps. A box-pushing task is described as a sequence of sub-tasks with a separate controller designed for each step using finite state automata theory. Perceptual cues are formed by concatenating binary variables which represent locally sensed stimuli into boolean vectors used to specify transitions between sub-task steps. The approach is designed for a redundant set of homogeneous mobile robots equipped with simple sensors and stimulus-response behaviours. A set of perceptual cues used in box-pushing are designed and tested on 10 physical mobile robots. It is argued that perceptual cues and finite state automata offers a new approach to environment-specific task modelling in collective robotics.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.396
Threshold uncertainty score0.384

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.106 · 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

Quick stats

Citations91
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicModular Robots and Swarm IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207