Coverage Control for Multiple Event Types with Heterogeneous Robots
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper focuses on the problem of deploying a set of autonomous robots to efficiently monitor multiple types of events in an environment. There is a density function over the environment for each event type representing the weighted likelihood of the event at each location. The robots are heterogeneous in that each robot is equipped with a set of sensors and it is capable of sensing a subset of event types. The objective is to deploy the robots in the environment to minimize a linear combination of the total sensing quality of the events. We propose a new formulation for the problem which is a natural extension of the homogeneous problem. We propose distributed algorithms that drive the robots to locally optimal positions in both continuous environments that are obstacle-free, and in discrete environments that may contain obstacles. In both cases we prove convergence to locally optimal positions. We provide extension to the case where the density functions are unknown prior to the deployment in continuous environments. Finally, we present benchmarking results and physical experiments to characterize the solution quality.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it