MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3163864251 · doi:10.1017/s0263574721000321

An inchworm-inspired motion strategy for robotic swarms

2021· article· en· W3163864251 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

VenueRobotica · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicModular Robots and Swarm Intelligence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSwarm behaviourSwarm roboticsRobotComputer scienceMotion (physics)Motion planningArtificial intelligenceControl engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Effective motion planning and localization are necessary tasks for swarm robotic systems to maintain a desired formation while maneuvering. Herein, we present an inchworm-inspired strategy that addresses both these tasks concurrently using anchor robots. The proposed strategy is novel as, by dynamically and optimally selecting the anchor robots, it allows the swarm to maximize its localization performance while also considering secondary objectives, such as the swarm’s speed. A complementary novel method for swarm localization, that fuses inter-robot proximity measurements and motion commands, is also presented. Numerous simulated and physical experiments are included to illustrate our contributions.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.722

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.236 · 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