MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2962742438

Square Formation by Asynchronous Oblivious Robots.

2016· article· en· W2962742438 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Conference on Computational Geometry · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptimization and Search Problems
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobotComputer scienceAsynchronous communicationCorrectnessMobile robotSquare (algebra)Theoretical computer scienceDegenerate energy levelsAlgorithmMathematicsArtificial intelligenceGeometryPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A fundamental problem in Distributed Computing is the Pattern Formation problem, where some independent mobile entities, called robots, have to rearrange themselves in such a way as to form a given figure from every possible (non-degenerate) initial configuration. In the present paper, we consider robots that operate in the Euclidean plane and are dimensionless, anonymous, oblivious, silent, asynchronous, disoriented, non-chiral, and non-rigid. For this very elementary type of robots, the feasibility of the Pattern Formation problem has been settled, either in the positive or in the negative, for every possible pattern, except for one case: the Square Formation problem by a team of four robots. Here we solve this last case by giving a Square Formation algorithm and proving its correctness. Our contribution represents the concluding chapter in a long thread of research. Our results imply that in the context of the Pattern Formation problem for mobile robots, features such as synchronicity, chirality, and rigidity are computationally irrelevant.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.243
Teacher spread0.218 · 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