Fault and Byzantine Tolerant Self-stabilizing Mobile Robots Gathering - Feasibility Study -
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gathering is a fundamental coordination problem in cooperative mobile robotics. In short, given a set of robots with arbitrary initial locations and no initial agreement on a global coordinate system, gathering requires that all robots, following their algorithm, reach the exact same but not predetermined location. Gathering is particularly challenging in networks where robots are oblivious (i.e., stateless) and direct communication is replaced by observations on their respective locations. Interestingly any algorithm that solves gathering with oblivious robots is inherently self-stabilizing if no specific assumption is made on the initial distribution of the robots. In this paper, we significantly extend the studies of de-terministic gathering feasibility under different assumptions This manuscript considerably extends preliminary results presented as an extended abstract at the DISC 2006 conference [7]. The current version is under review at Distributed Computing Journal since February 2012 (in a previous form) and since 2014 in the current form. The most important results have been also presented in MAC 2010 organized in Ottawa from August 15th to 17th 2010 related to synchrony and faults (crash and Byzantine). Unlike prior work, we consider a larger set of scheduling strategies, such as bounded schedulers. In addition, we extend our study to the feasibility of probabilistic self-stabilizing gathering in both fault-free and fault-prone environments.
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 | 0.003 | 0.018 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".