MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2975877068 · doi:10.1109/infcomw.2019.8845318

Geocaching-inspired Resilient Path Planning for Drone Swarms

2019· article· en· W2975877068 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDroneComputer scienceMotion planningSpoofing attackPath (computing)Global Positioning SystemDimension (graph theory)Real-time computingArtificial intelligenceComputer securityRobotComputer networkMathematicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A path planning algorithm for drone swarms is presented. From the outset, none of the drones knows the path and final destination. Together, they collectively determine and unravel step-by-step the waypoints and final destination, resolving a localization problem at each step. It is a shared-information path planning algorithm. The algorithm is fault-tolerant and resilient to drones falling victim of attacks to their positioning system. It is shown that correctly functioning drones navigate the path provided that the number of faulty drones is less than [(n-d)/2], where n is the total number of drones and d, equal to two or three, is the dimension of the space navigated by the drones. We validate the algorithm with appropriate simulations, implemented over OMNeT++ and GNSSim, which allow building network simulations including GPS attacks (e.g., jamming and spoofing attacks). The OMNeT++ models and GNSSim functions are linked together.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.517
Threshold uncertainty score0.617

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207