MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768333392 · doi:10.3390/ecsa-4-04911

Automatic Task Selection from Targets Recognition for Swarm Mobile Robots with Specialized Agents

2017· article· en· W2768333392 on OpenAlexafffund
Omar Al-Buraiki, Pierre Payeur, Henrique Morales Busiquia

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicModular Robots and Swarm Intelligence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSwarm roboticsTask (project management)RobotSwarm behaviourComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMobile robotSelection (genetic algorithm)RoboticsHuman–computer interactionDistributed computingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Considering specialized agents in swarm robotics, with robots dedicated to specific tasks, requires that formation control and efficient transition in the leadership of the swarm is achieved. Here, a task switching approach is formulated by evolving the definition of specialization to match with targets recognition in the environment, such as detecting special landmarks via embedded sensors. Specialization zones are defined around each detected target corresponding to a task to be dealt with by a specific robot. Entering within the zone of influence surrounding a target triggers the switching of the leader of the formation. The framework is also further refined by making the targets, and therefore the corresponding zone of influence, dynamic, which leads to the consideration of combined specialization areas. The proposed system is validated in simulation to demonstrate that the group of robots effectively coordinate themselves around targets and dynamically allocate the appropriate specialized agent.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.261
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 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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicModular Robots and Swarm IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207