MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3083242470 · doi:10.1504/ijris.2020.10031841

Design and optimisation of bio-inspired robotic stochastic search strategy

2020· article· en· W3083242470 on OpenAlexaff
Farhad Maroofkhani, Kazuo Ishii, Amir Ali Forough Nassiraei

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Reasoning-based Intelligent Systems · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDiffusion and Search Dynamics
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobotSet (abstract data type)Computer scienceResource (disambiguation)ForagingMathematical optimizationSpace (punctuation)Random searchArtificial intelligenceMachine learningMathematicsAlgorithmEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An autonomous robot's search strategy is the set of rules that it employs while looking for targets in its environment. Biological systems (e.g., foraging animals) provide useful inspirations for designing optimal stochastic search algorithms for autonomous robots. Due to the complexity of interaction between the robot and its environment, optimisation must be performed in high-dimensional parameter space. We analyse the dependence of search efficiency on environmental parameters and robot characteristics using response surface methodology (RSM), a technique originally developed for experimental design. In this study, the efficiency of a strategy focuses on Lévy walk search strategies on two-dimensional landscapes with clumped resource distributions. We show how RSM techniques can be used to identify optimal parameter values and to describe how sensitive is the efficiency to the changes in these values.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Reasoning-based Intelligent SystemsSame topicDiffusion and Search DynamicsFrench-language works237,207