MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2420365738 · doi:10.1109/syscon.2016.7490516

Decentralized learning in pursuit-evasion differential games with multi-pursuer and single-superior evader

2016· article· en· W2420365738 on OpenAlexaff
Mostafa D. Awheda, Howard M. Schwartz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGuidance and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPursuerPursuit-evasionComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematical optimizationControl theory (sociology)AlgorithmMathematicsControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we consider a multi-pursuer single-superior-evader pursuit-evasion differential game where the speed of the evader is similar to the speed of each pursuer. A new fuzzy reinforcement learning algorithm is proposed in this work for this game. Each pursuer of the game uses the proposed algorithm to learn its control strategy. The proposed algorithm of each pursuer uses the residual gradient fuzzy actor critic learning (RGFACL) algorithm to tune the parameters of the fuzzy logic controller (FLC) of the pursuer. The proposed algorithm uses a formation control approach in the tuning mechanism of the FLC of the learning pursuer so that the learning pursuer or the other learning pursuers can capture the superior evader. The formation control mechanism used by the proposed algorithm guarantees that the pursuers are distributed around the superior evader in order to avoid collision between pursuers. The formation control mechanism also guarantees that the capture regions of each two adjacent pursuers overlap or at least border each other so that the capture of the superior evader will be guaranteed. The proposed algorithm is a decentralized algorithm as no communication among pursuers is required. The only information that the proposed algorithm of each learning pursuer requires is the position and the speed of the superior evader. The proposed algorithm is used to learn a multi-pursuer single-superior-evader pursuitevasion differential game. The simulation results show the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm as the superior evader is always captured by one or some of the pursuers learning their strategies by the proposed algorithm.

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)0.002
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 score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 science0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations11
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGuidance and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207