Level-Headed: Evaluating Gimbal-Stabilised Visual Teach and Repeat for Improved Localisation Performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Operating in rough, unstructured terrain is an essential requirement for any truly field-deployable ground robot. Search-and-rescue, border patrol and agricultural work all require operation in environments with little established infrastructure for easy navigation. This presents challenges for sensor-based navigation such as vision, where erratic motion and feature-poor environments test feature tracking and hinder the performance of repeat matching of point features. For vision-based route-following methods such as Visual Teach and Repeat (VT&R), maintaining similar visual perspective of salient point features is critical for reliable odometry and accurate localisation over long periods. In this paper, we investigate a potential solution to these challenges by integrating a gimbaled camera with VT&R on a Grizzly Robotic Utility Vehicle (RUV) for testing at high speeds and in visually challenging environments. We examine the benefits and drawbacks of using an actively gimbaled camera to attenuate image motion and control viewpoint. We compare the use of a gimbaled camera to our traditional fixed stereo configuration and demonstrate cases of improved performance in Visual Odometry (VO), localisation and path following in several sets of outdoor experiments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".