MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3135089179 · doi:10.1109/lra.2021.3067281

Rover Relocalization for Mars Sample Return by Virtual Template Synthesis and Matching

2021· preprint· en· W3135089179 on OpenAlexaff
Tu-Hoa Pham, William Seto, Shreyansh Daftry, Barry Ridge, Johanna Hansen, Tristan Thrush, Mark Van der Merwe, Gerard Maggiolino, Alexander Brinkman, John Mayo, Yang Cheng, Curtis Padgett, Eric Kulczycki, Renaud Detry

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Robotics and Automation Letters · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCalifornia Institute of TechnologyJet Propulsion LaboratoryNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsTerrainMars Exploration ProgramRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceSample (material)Context (archaeology)Matching (statistics)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionSet (abstract data type)GeographyCartographyMathematicsAstrobiologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the problem of rover relocalization in the context of the notional Mars Sample Return campaign. In this campaign, a rover (R1) needs to be capable of autonomously navigating and localizing itself within an area of approximately 50 ×50 m using reference images collected years earlier by another rover (R0). We propose a visual localizer that exhibits robustness to the relatively barren terrain that we expect to find in relevant areas, and to large lighting and viewpoint differences between R0 and R1. The localizer synthesizes partial renderings of a mesh built from reference R0 images and matches those to R1 images. We evaluate our method on a dataset totaling 2160 images covering the range of expected environmental conditions (terrain, lighting, approach angle). Experimental results show the effectiveness of our approach. This work informs the Mars Sample Return campaign on the choice of a site where Perseverance (R0) will place a set of sample tubes for future retrieval by another rover (R1).

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.780
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.209
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Robotics and Automation LettersSame topicRobotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationFrench-language works237,207