MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972941110 · doi:10.1109/lra.2020.2964159

Online Trajectory Generation With Distributed Model Predictive Control for Multi-Robot Motion Planning

2020· article· en· W2972941110 on OpenAlexaff
Carlos E. Luis, Marijan Vukosavljev, Angela P. Schoellig

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Robotics and Automation Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsDynamic Systems Analysis (Canada)University of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrajectoryModel predictive controlComputer scienceMotion planningMotion (physics)Control (management)Control theory (sociology)RobotArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a distributed model predictive control (DMPC) algorithm to generate trajectories in real-time for multiple robots. We adopted the on-demand collision avoidance method presented in previous work to efficiently compute non-colliding trajectories in transition tasks. An event-triggered replanning strategy is proposed to account for disturbances. Our simulation results show that the proposed collision avoidance method can reduce, on average, around 50% of the travel time required to complete a multi-agent point-to-point transition when compared to the well-studied Buffered Voronoi Cells (BVC) approach. Additionally, it shows a higher success rate in transition tasks with a high density of agents, with more than 90% success rate with 30 palm-sized quadrotor agents in a 18 m3arena. The approach was experimentally validated with a swarm of up to 20 drones flying in close proximity.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations247
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Robotics and Automation LettersSame topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207