Scalable Multi-Robot System for Non-myopic Spatial Sampling.
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a distributed scalable multi-robot planning algorithm for non-uniform sampling of quasi-static spatial fields. We address the problem of efficient data collection using multiple autonomous vehicles. In this paper, we are interested in analyzing the effect of communication between multiple robots, acting independently, on the overall sampling performance of the team. Our focus is on distributed sampling problem where the robots are operating independent of their teammates, but have the ability to communicate their states to other neighbors with a constraint on the communication range. We design and apply an informed non-myopic path planning technique on multiple robotic platforms to efficiently collect measurements from a spatial field. Our proposed approach is highly adaptive to challenging environments, growing team size, and runs in real-time, which are the key features for any real-world scenario. The results show that our distributed sampling approach is able to achieve efficient sampling with minimal communication between the robots. We evaluate our approach in simulation over multiple distributions commonly occurring in nature and on the real-world data collected during a field trial.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it