MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4250455569 · doi:10.1109/ijcnn.2006.1716795

Extend Single-agent Reinforcement Learning Approach to a Multi-robot Cooperative Task in an Unknown Dynamic Environment

2006· article· en· W4250455569 on OpenAlexaff
Ying Wang, C.W. de Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueThe 2006 IEEE International Joint Conference on Neural Network Proceedings · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforcement learningComputer scienceRobotMarkov decision processRobustness (evolution)Robot learningArtificial intelligenceQ-learningObstacleMobile robotMarkov processMachine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Machine learning technology helps multi-robot systems to carry out desired tasks in an unknown dynamic environment. In this paper, we extend the single-agent Q-learning algorithm to a multi-robot box-pushing system in an unknown dynamic environment with random obstacle distribution. There are two kinds of extensions available: directly extending MDP (Markov decision process) based Q-learning to the multi-robot domain, and SG-based (stochastic game based) Q-learning. Here, we select the first kind of extension because of its simplicity. The learning space, the box dynamics, and the reward function etc. are presented in this paper. Furthermore, a simulation system is developed and its results show effectiveness, robustness and adaptivity of this learning-based multi-robot system. Our statistical analysis of the results also shows that the robots learned correct cooperative strategy even in a dynamic environment.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.267
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe 2006 IEEE International Joint Conference on Neural Network ProceedingsSame topicReinforcement Learning in RoboticsFrench-language works237,207