MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802892321 · doi:10.1177/0278364918772024

Active sensing for motion planning in uncertain environments via mutual information policies

2018· article· en· W2802892321 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Robotics Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptimization and Search Problems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRobotScalabilityMotion planningA priori and a posterioriComputer scienceGraphPath (computing)Mathematical optimizationEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionUpper and lower boundsArtificial intelligenceTheoretical computer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses path planning with real-time reaction to environmental uncertainty. The environment is represented as a robotic roadmap, or graph, and is uncertain in that the edges of the graph are unknown to the robot a priori. Instead, the robot’s prior information consists of a distribution over candidate edge sets, modeling the likelihood of certain obstacles in the environment. The robot can locally sense the environment, and at a vertex, can determine the presence or absence of some subset of edges. Within this model, the reactive planning problem provides the robot with a start location and a goal location and asks it to compute a policy that minimizes the expected travel and observation cost. In contrast to computing paths that maximize the probability of success, we focus on complete policies (i.e., policies that are guaranteed to navigate the robot to the goal or determine no such path exists). We prove that the problem is NP-hard and provide a suboptimal, but computationally efficient solution. This solution, based on mutual information, returns a complete policy and a bound on the gap between the policy’s expected cost and the optimal. We test the performance of the policy and the lower bound against that of the optimal policy and explore the effects of errors in the robot’s prior information on performance. Simulations are run on a flexible factory scenario to demonstrate the scalability of the proposed approach. Finally, we present a method to extend this solution to robots with faulty sensors.

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.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score0.253

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.304 · 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