MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2610801907 · doi:10.1117/12.2263514

Unobtrusive and assistive obstacle avoidance for tele-operation of ground vehicles

2017· article· en· W2610801907 on OpenAlexafffund
Mingfeng Zhang, Piotr Jasiobedzki

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsGolder Associates (Canada)
FundersOntario Centres of Excellence
KeywordsSAFERObstacle avoidanceObstacleComputer scienceCollision avoidanceOperator (biology)RobotKinematicsUnmanned ground vehicleSimulationInterference (communication)Mobile robotEngineeringControl engineeringArtificial intelligenceComputer securityTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a new obstacle avoidance method that provides unobtrusive assistance to tele-operation of unmanned ground vehicles. Different from existing obstacle avoidance methods, the present method can determine whether the driving commands from an operator are safe in the presence of obstacles and can automatically adjust unsafe commands to help the operator avoid proximate obstacles. The command adjustment is done in an unobtrusive manner and conforms to the dynamic and kinematic constraints of the vehicle in order to minimize its interference to the operator. Due to its assistive and unobtrusive nature, this method can quietly share some control authority with an operator in tele-operating a vehicle, and hence it has the potential to make tele-operation of ground vehicles in challenging environments significantly easier and safer. The effectiveness of this method is demonstrated in extensive experiments in cluttered environments using military-grade tracked robots.

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 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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.727
Threshold uncertainty score0.842

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0020.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207