MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898354798 · doi:10.1002/rob.21833

Data‐driven mobility risk prediction for planetary rovers

2018· article· en· W2898354798 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

VenueJournal of Field Robotics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil Mechanics and Vehicle Dynamics
Canadian institutionsShared Services CanadaConcordia University
FundersCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsSlip (aerodynamics)PredictabilityTerrainComputer scienceMobility modelGeologyEngineeringMathematicsDistributed computingAerospace engineeringGeographyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Mobility assessment and prediction continues to be an important and active area of research for planetary rovers, with the need illustrated by multiple examples of high slip events experienced by rovers on Mars. Despite slip versus slope being one of the strongest and most broadly used relationships in mobility prediction, this relationship is nonetheless far from precisely predictable. Although the literature has made significant advances in the predictability of average mobility, the other key related aspect of the problem is the risk caused by edge cases. A key contribution of this study is a metric for explicitly assessing mobility risk based on data‐driven nonparametric slip versus slope relationships. The data‐driven approach is meant to address limitations of past model‐based approaches. The metric is informed by past work in terramechanics relating drawbar pull (i.e., net traction) to slip: High slip fraction (HSF), defined as the proportion of slip data points above 20%. Another contribution is a low complexity mobility prediction framework, the autonomous soil assessment system. Field tests demonstrate that, for sand and gravel, rover trafficability becomes nonlinear and highly variable above the 20% slip threshold. HSF is shown to be a useful metric for categorizing rover‐terrain interactions into low, medium, or high risk, correctly and consistently. Furthermore, the metric is shown to be useful for early detection of potentially hazardous changes in rover‐terrain conditions. The combination of HSF with an appropriately sized queue structure for modeling slip versus slope enables an appropriate balance between responsiveness and stability.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.739
Threshold uncertainty score0.241

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.224 · 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