MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991025517 · doi:10.1109/smc.2019.8914510

Distributed Multi-Robot Formation Control Based on Two-Layer Nearest Neighbor Information(TNNI) Consensus

2019· article· en· W2991025517 on OpenAlexaff
Guang Deng, Hui Zhang, Hang Zhong, Zhiqiang Miao, Li Liu, Miao Yu, Q. M. Jonathan Wu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMobile robotRobotComputer scienceConvergence (economics)Swarm behaviourLayer (electronics)k-nearest neighbors algorithmSwarm roboticsControl (management)Swarm intelligenceRobot controlDistributed computingArtificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the development of artificial intelligence, robot swarm systems also frequently appear in complex tasks of different situation. One of the important research directions is the formation of multi-robots. This paper analyzes the limitations of existing algorithms for large-scale mobile robot swarm formation control problems and proposes a consensus control algorithm with two-layer nearest neighbor information. It carries out experimental simulation to verify its convergence performance. At the same time, combined with a distributed structure control strategy that can change the number of robot formation members, the formation control experiment is carried out on the experimental platform consisted of robot state information detection device and multiple mobile robots,to further verify its feasibility.

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)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed Control Multi-Agent SystemsFrench-language works237,207