MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2314054766 · doi:10.2514/6.2016-0676

High-Fidelity General-Purpose Robotic Simulation Framework for Artificially Intelligent Space Exploration Vehicles

2016· article· en· W2314054766 on OpenAlexaff
Shawn M. Walker, Jinjun Shan

Bibliographic record

VenueAIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicModular Robots and Swarm Intelligence
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFidelitySpace (punctuation)High fidelitySpace explorationHuman–computer interactionRobotSimulationArtificial intelligenceSystems engineeringAerospace engineeringEngineeringElectrical engineeringTelecommunicationsOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the design, open-problems, and preliminary results of a long-term research project into the development of a sophisticated simulation framework for artificially intelligent space exploration vehicles. This research project uses popular open-source software libraries and tools from the academic literature as its base and extends on top of it. The purpose of this project is to improve the current state of general-purpose robotic simulation technology in order to improve real-world space exploration vehicles and the artificially intelligent algorithms that they deploy. Artificially intelligent space exploration vehicles are dependent on simulation technology because simulators are used throughout the entire design and development process, and this means that the state, accuracy, and capabilities of the simulation technology is very indicative to the future of space exploration. General-purpose robotic simulators are a special class of simulator designed to simulate everything inherent in a real-world robotics application. The problem with the current general-purpose robotic simulation technology is that the behavior of the simulated vehicles is not realistic enough and does not emulate the real-world to a high enough degree of accuracy. The goal of the research being presented in this paper is to greatly increase the precision and accuracy of the vehicles behavior so as to mimic the real-world behavior as closely as possible, which in turn will produce better real-world artificially intelligent algorithms and space vehicles.

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)0.001
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies ConferenceSame topicModular Robots and Swarm IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207