MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Model Predictive Control for Cooperative Hunting in Obstacle Rich and Dynamic Environments

2021· article· en· W3207097712 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObstacleObstacle avoidanceMaxima and minimaComputer scienceCollision avoidanceModel predictive controlPlannerReciprocalControl (management)CollisionTrajectoryControl theory (sociology)Motion planningRobotArtificial intelligenceMobile robotMathematicsGeographyComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper studies the cooperative hunting problem, where a group of agents encircle a target while avoiding collisions with each other and with obstacles in the environment. The paper deals with obstacle rich environments and dynamic (moving obstacle) environments by formulating the problem as both a control problem and a planning problem. A model predictive control (MPC) method is proposed which integrates a multi-agent planner with the cooperative hunting objective while also accounting for UAV dynamics. The effectiveness of the proposed method is verified through a comparative analysis with optimal reciprocal collision avoidance (ORCA), and then validated through experiments with quadrotor UAVs. Using the proposed method, agents no longer get stuck in local minima for obstacle rich environments and capture the target faster with shorter trajectories in moving obstacle environments.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score0.535

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed Control Multi-Agent SystemsFrench-language works237,207