Uncertainty-Constrained Differential Dynamic Programming in Belief Space for Vision Based Robots
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most mobile robots follow a modular sense-plan-act system architecture that can lead to poor performance or even catastrophic failure for visual inertial navigation systems due to trajectories devoid of feature matches. Planning in belief space provides a unified approach to tightly couple the perception, planning and control modules, leading to trajectories that are robust to noisy measurements and disturbances. However, existing methods handle uncertainties as costs that require manual tuning for varying environments and hardware. We therefore propose a novel trajectory optimization formulation that incorporates inequality constraints on uncertainty and a novel Augmented Lagrangian based stochastic differential dynamic programming method in belief space. Furthermore, we develop a probabilistic visibility model that accounts for discontinuities due to feature visibility limits. Our simulation tests demonstrate that our method can handle inequality constraints in different environments, for holonomic and nonholonomic motion models with no manual tuning of uncertainty costs involved. We also show the improved optimization performance in belief space due to our visibility model.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".