MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2172167902 · doi:10.1109/tsmcb.2011.2132716

Target-Motion Prediction for Robotic Search and Rescue in Wilderness Environments

2011· article· en· W2172167902 on OpenAlexaff
Ashish Macwan, Goldie Nejat, B. Benhabib

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part B (Cybernetics) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerrainSearch and rescueWildernessMotion (physics)Wilderness areaComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceModular designRobotMechanism (biology)Space (punctuation)SimulationComputer visionMachine learningHuman–computer interactionGeographyEcologyBiologyCartographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel modular methodology for predicting a lost person's (motion) behavior for autonomous coordinated multirobot wilderness search and rescue. The new concept of isoprobability curves is introduced and developed, which represents a unique mechanism for identifying the target's probable location at any given time within the search area while accounting for influences such as terrain topology, target physiology and psychology, clues found, etc. The isoprobability curves are propagated over time and space. The significant tangible benefit of the proposed target-motion prediction methodology is demonstrated through a comparison to a nonprobabilistic approach, as well as through a simulated realistic wilderness search scenario.

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)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.197 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations45
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part B (Cybernetics)Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207