MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Trajectory planning under environmental uncertainty with finite-sample safety guarantees

2021· article· en· W3175147250 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAutomatica · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersEuropean Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungEuropean CommissionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsTrajectoryConstraint (computer-aided design)GaussianMathematical optimizationSample (material)Finite setSet (abstract data type)Computer scienceGaussian processTrajectory optimizationMathematicsControl theory (sociology)Control (management)Optimal controlArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We tackle the problem of trajectory planning in an environment comprised of a set of obstacles with uncertain time-varying locations. The uncertainties are modeled using widely accepted Gaussian distributions, resulting in a chance-constrained program. Contrary to previous approaches however, we do not assume perfect knowledge of the moments of the distribution, and instead estimate them through finite samples available from either sensors or past data. We derive tight concentration bounds on the error of these estimates to sufficiently tighten the chance-constraint program. As such, we provide provable guarantees on satisfaction of the chance-constraints corresponding to the nominal yet unknown moments. We illustrate our results with two autonomous vehicle trajectory planning case studies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.891
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.242 · 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