Flexible Multi-Robot Formation Control: Partial Formations as Physical Data Structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Formations are often seen in nature, and bring many benefits for the group as a whole. They can allow a group to explore a large area more effectively, can ease movement of the group through the environment, and can increase group perceptual coverage and increase defensive capabilities, for example. The benefits of any particular formation vary and are obtained from the structure the formation provides. Robotic formations can have similar applications. To date, the techniques used and formations employed in robotic applications are significantly simpler than those seen in nature. Current techniques often require some level of global knowledge, central processing or other unrealistic assumptions. We seek to develop a formation control technique that has as few of these limitations as possible. Each agent under our approach has only local knowledge of the environment, uses no broadcast communication, and can communicate only over a limited range. Formations are achieved by organizing agents into a graph structure, where agents occupying the vertices take on the role of maintaining an appropriate number of agents on each edge, thus preserving the formation’s shape and scale. We do not assume a known or static population: the evolving formation acts as a physical data structure to assist in placing and rearranging agents as the population changes. This approach does not require a global coordinate system, fixed positions within the formation, or any single lead agent. All agents within our approach are peers, and any can adopt any role within the formation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".