MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2290526384 · doi:10.1109/cdc.2015.7402010

Cooperative control for multi-target interception with sensing and communication limitations: A game-theoretic approach

2015· article· en· W2290526384 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
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegretInterceptionComputer scienceController (irrigation)State (computer science)Control (management)Game theoryNash equilibriumMathematical optimizationDistributed computingArtificial intelligenceMachine learningAlgorithmMathematical economicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the problem of multi-vehicle cooperative interception of moving objects with unknown arrival times, trajectories and dynamics is investigated. The vehicles are assumed to have limited sensing and communication ranges. Therefore, centralized approaches are not feasible, specially when there are a large number of vehicles and targets. A game theoretic cooperative receding horizon controller is proposed here to address this problem. The control design is based on the prediction of the future positions of targets with limited information, as well as a reward allocation policy for accomplishing the target interception tasks. To learn the optimal strategy in the resulting potential game, a state-of-the-art method, the generalized regret monitoring, is applied and its effectiveness is demonstrated by simulation.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score0.480

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed Control Multi-Agent SystemsFrench-language works237,207