MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2962815477 · doi:10.3390/robotics8030061

A Sensor-Network-Supported Mobile-Agent-Search Strategy for Wilderness Rescue

2019· article· en· W2962815477 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

VenueRobotics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftware deploymentComputer scienceSearch and rescueHeuristicReal-time computingIterative deepening depth-first searchMathematical optimizationSearch algorithmIncremental heuristic searchDistributed computingArtificial intelligenceBeam searchAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mobile target search is a problem pertinent to a variety of applications, including wilderness search and rescue. This paper proposes a hybrid approach for target search utilizing a team of mobile agents supported by a network of static sensors. The approach is novel in that the mobile agents deploy the sensors at optimized times and locations while they themselves travel along their respective optimized search trajectories. In the proposed approach, mobile-agent trajectories are first planned to maximize the likelihood of target detection. The deployment of the static-sensor network is subsequently planned. Namely, deployment locations and times are optimized while being constrained by the already planned mobile-agent trajectories. The latter optimization problem, as formulated and solved herein, aims to minimize an overall network-deployment error. This overall error comprises three main components, each quantifying a deviation from one of three main objectives the network aims to achieve: (i) maintaining directional unbiasedness in target-motion consideration, (ii) maintaining unbiasedness in temporal search-effort distribution, and, (iii) maximizing the likelihood of target detection. We solve this unique optimization problem using an iterative heuristic-based algorithm with random starts. The proposed hybrid search strategy was validated through the extensive simulations presented in this paper. Furthermore, its performance was evaluated with respect to an alternative hybrid search strategy, where it either outperformed or performed comparably depending on the search resources available.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.250 · 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