DOOR-SLAM: Distributed, Online, and Outlier Resilient SLAM for Robotic Teams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
© 2016 IEEE. To achieve collaborative tasks, robots in a team need to have a shared understanding of the environment and their location within it. Distributed Simultaneous Localization and Mapping (SLAM) offers a practical solution to localize the robots without relying on an external positioning system (e.g. GPS) and with minimal information exchange. Unfortunately, current distributed SLAM systems are vulnerable to perception outliers and therefore tend to use very conservative parameters for inter-robot place recognition. However, being too conservative comes at the cost of rejecting many valid loop closure candidates, which results in less accurate trajectory estimates. This letter introduces DOOR-SLAM, a fully distributed SLAM system with an outlier rejection mechanism that can work with less conservative parameters. DOOR-SLAM is based on peer-to-peer communication and does not require full connectivity among the robots. DOOR-SLAM includes two key modules: a pose graph optimizer combined with a distributed pairwise consistent measurement set maximization algorithm to reject spurious inter-robot loop closures; and a distributed SLAM front-end that detects inter-robot loop closures without exchanging raw sensor data. The system has been evaluated in simulations, benchmarking datasets, and field experiments, including tests in GPS-denied subterranean environments. DOOR-SLAM produces more inter-robot loop closures, successfully rejects outliers, and results in accurate trajectory estimates, while requiring low communication bandwidth. Full source code is available at https://github.com/MISTLab/DOOR-SLAM.git.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".