MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2978697398 · doi:10.3390/app9194108

Intelligent Path Recognition against Image Noises for Vision Guidance of Automated Guided Vehicles in a Complex Workspace

2019· article· en· W2978697398 on OpenAlexaff
Xing Wu, Chao Sun, Ting Zou, Haining Xiao, Longjun Wang, Jingjing Zhai

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Object Detection Techniques
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer visionWorkspaceArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePath (computing)Robot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Applying computer vision to mobile robot navigation has been studied more than two decades. The most challenging problems for a vision-based AGV running in a complex workspace involve the non-uniform illumination, sight-line occlusion or stripe damage, which inevitably result in incomplete or deformed path images as well as many fake artifacts. Neither the fixed threshold methods nor the iterative optimal threshold methods can obtain a suitable threshold for the path images acquired on all conditions. It is still an open question to estimate the model parameters of guide paths accurately by distinguishing the actual path pixels from the under- or over- segmentation error points. Hence, an intelligent path recognition approach based on KPCA–BPNN and IPSO–BTGWP is proposed here, in order to resist the interferences from the complex workspace. Firstly, curvilinear paths were recognized from their straight counterparts by means of a path classifier based on KPCA–BPNN. Secondly, an approximation method based on BTGWP was developed for replacing the curve with a series of piecewise lines (a polyline path). Thirdly, a robust path estimation method based on IPSO was proposed to figure out the path parameters from a set of path pixels surrounded by noise points. Experimental results showed that our approach can effectively improve the accuracy and reliability of a low-cost vision-guidance system for AGVs in a complex workspace.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations21
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicImage and Object Detection TechniquesFrench-language works237,207