MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048709413 · doi:10.1109/lra.2020.3015464

Target Search on Road Networks With Range-Constrained UAVs and Ground-Based Mobile Recharging Vehicles

2020· article· en· W3048709413 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

VenueIEEE Robotics and Automation Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsAUG Signals (Canada)University of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRendezvousRange (aeronautics)Integer programmingLinear programmingRouting (electronic design automation)Real-time computingEngineeringComputer networkAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study a range-constrained variant of the multi-UAV target search problem where commercially available UAVs are used for target search in tandem with ground-based mobile recharging vehicles (MRVs) that can travel, via the road network, to meet up with and recharge a UAV. We propose a pipeline for representing the problem on real-world road networks, starting with a map of the road network and yielding a final routing graph that permits UAVs to recharge via rendezvous with MRVs. The problem is then solved using mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) and constraint programming (CP). We conduct a comprehensive simulation of our methods using real-world road network data from Scotland. The assessment investigates accumulated search reward compared to ideal and worst-case scenarios and briefly explores the impact of UAV speeds. Our empirical results indicate that CP is able to provide better solutions than MILP, overall, and that the use of a fleet of MRVs can improve the accumulated reward of the UAV fleet, supporting their inclusion for surveillance tasks.

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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.672
Threshold uncertainty score0.438

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.188 · 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