MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4288391271 · doi:10.1109/lra.2022.3194691

TAPE: Tether-Aware Path Planning for Autonomous Exploration of Unknown 3D Cavities Using a Tangle-Compatible Tethered Aerial Robot

2022· article· en· W4288391271 on OpenAlexafffund
Louis Petit, Alexis Lussier Desbiens

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Robotics and Automation Letters · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsTravelling salesman problemMotion planningPath (computing)Computer sciencePath lengthRobotRoboticsFunction (biology)Mathematical optimizationSimulationAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This letter presents the first method for autonomous exploration of unknown cavities in three dimensions (3D) that focuses on minimizing the distance traveled and the length of tether unwound. Considering that the tether entanglements are little influenced by the global path, our approach employs a 2-level hierarchical architecture. The global frontier-based planning solves a Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP) to minimize the distance. The local planning attempts to minimize the path cost and the tether length using an adjustable decision function whose parameters play on the trade-off between these two values. The proposed method, TAPE, is evaluated through detailed simulation studies as well as field tests. On average, our method generates a 4.1% increase in distance traveled compared to the TSP solution without our local planner, with which the length of the tether remains below the maximum allowed value in 53% of the simulated cases against 100% with our method.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0010.001
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.277
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

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

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Robotics and Automation LettersSame topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207