MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2736316887 · doi:10.1109/icra.2017.7989234

Falling in line: Visual route following on extreme terrain for a tethered mobile robot

2017· article· en· W2736316887 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick McGarey, Max Polzin, Timothy D. Barfoot

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerrainTraverseRobotMobile robotObstacleComputer scienceBang-bang robotComputer visionArtificial intelligenceSimulationSearch and rescueTrajectoryObstacle avoidanceHeading (navigation)Robot kinematicsEngineeringGeodesyGeologyAerospace engineeringPhysicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes visual route following for a cliff-climbing, tethered mobile robot for the purpose of autonomously traversing extreme terrain in the presence of obstacles. When the robot's tether contacts an obstacle, an intermediate anchor is formed. In order to detach from intermediate anchors and avoid entanglement, the robot must backtrack along its outgoing trajectory. We use the Visual Teach & Repeat (VT&R) algorithm to autonomously repeat a manually taught path. However, our problem is complicated by the fact that the robot's tether must (i) remain taut regardless of inclination, (ii) allow the robot to drive freely, and (iii) provide motion assistance when wheel traction is reduced on steep slopes. To enable visual route following over varied terrain, we have developed a novel tether controller that selects a safe, steady-state tension based on the robot's inclination while also accounting for vehicle motion. Experiments are performed on our Tethered Robotic Explorer (TReX), which autonomously repeats paths while tethered in both flat-indoor and steep-outdoor environments in the presence of obstacles.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations16
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207