MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285044551 · doi:10.22215/etd/2022-15057

Strategies for Cooperative Energy Distribution on Multi-Robot Warehouse Systems

2022· dissertation· en· W4285044551 on OpenAlexaff
Tabarak Al-Gafari

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptimization and Search Problems
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobotMobile robotPower (physics)Battery capacityEnergy (signal processing)EngineeringFeature (linguistics)Battery (electricity)Computer scienceReal-time computingSimulationArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autonomous mobile robots are one of the new and innovative ways to improve operation in industries such as warehouses, logistic companies, agricultural businesses, healthcare institutions, and a lot more.They are known for their operational improvement, safety, efficiency, and speed, automating several functionalities so they can be performed with little or no human intervention.These advantages can only be realized, however, if the degree of autonomy suffices for the task at hand.Whilst many degrees of autonomy exist (e.g., functional autonomy), in this thesis we are primarily concerned with an aspect of non-functional autonomy: energy.One of the important features of an autonomous robot system is the capability to charge autonomously with little to no human intervention.This thesis examines the energy distribution problem on multi-robot warehouse systems.We model warehouse systems where robots charge autonomously, pausing their workload when needed, to charge at a station.Depending on specific execution, it is possible that robots fully deplete their energy before arriving at a charging station, decreasing total work achieved, and becoming an obstacle on the warehouse floor.We then introduce the concept of energy sharing, where robots are capable of charging one another, essentially becoming mobile charging stations.In this context, the problem of energy distribution becomes a problem of multi-agent collaboration.We analyze the impact of our solution on a multi-agent simulation, showing that energy sharing for autonomous mobile robots in warehouse systems reduces the total number of depleted robots and contributes to increasing the amount of work performed.

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)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.276 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptimization and Search ProblemsFrench-language works237,207