MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898729409 · doi:10.1002/rob.21813

Developing and deploying a tethered robot to map extremely steep terrain

2018· article· en· W2898729409 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick McGarey, David J. Yoon, Tim Y. Tang, François Pomerleau, Timothy D. Barfoot

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Field Robotics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer visionTerrainComputer sciencePoint cloudArtificial intelligenceRobotIterative closest pointMobile robotTrajectoryOdometryLidarLeverage (statistics)Remote sensingGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Mobile robots outfitted with a supportive tether are ideal for gaining access to extreme environments for mapping when human or remote observation is not possible. This paper is a field report covering both the development and field testing of our Tethered Robotic eXplorer (TReX) to map a steep, tree‐covered rock outcrop in a gravel mine. TReX is a mobile robot designed for the purpose of mapping extremely steep and cluttered environments for geologic and infrastructure inspection. In comparison to other systems, our design improves tethered mobility by enabling rotational freedom on steep slopes using a center‐pivoting tether management payload. To map the terrain, we leverage the rotation of an actuated tether spool with an attached two‐dimensional (2D) lidar, which rotates to both manage tether and produce 3D scans. Given that mapping requires vehicle motion, we also evaluate two existing, real‐time approaches to estimate the trajectory of the robot and rectify motion distortion from individual scans before alignment into the map: (a) a continuous‐time, lidar‐only approach that handles asynchronous measurements using a physically motivated, constant‐velocity motion prior, and (b) a method that computes visual odometry from streaming stereo images to use as a motion estimate during scan collection. Once rectified, individual scans are matched to the global map by an efficient variant of the Iterative Closest Point (ICP) algorithm. Our results include a comparison of estimated maps and trajectories to ground truth (measured by a remote survey station), an example of mapping in highly cluttered terrain, and lessons learned from the design and deployment of TReX.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
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)0.0020.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations20
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Field RoboticsSame topicRobotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationFrench-language works237,207