MarsSim: A high-fidelity physical and visual simulation for Mars rovers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Simulation has deeply infiltrated into the development and validation of planetary rover technologies concerning mobility and autonomy, by providing large amounts of data in a variety of conditions and environments, as well as high-fidelity prototypes. Prevalent approaches for rover simulation focus either on physical behaviors or visual scenarios. In this paper, we present a simulator named MarsSim developed upon ROS/Gazebo platform that supports both physical and visual realistic simulations. The interaction between the wheel and the rough deformable terrain is modeled with improved contact solutions, and the model is integrated into a refined physical simulation architecture as an independent terramechanics plugin. Using multi-scale planetary data and representation models, Martian scenarios are constructed, considering characteristics in terms of the surface, rock and atmosphere. Compared with experiments, the terramechanics plugin shows great modelling accuracy in fitting interactive force/torque and slip-sinkage phenomenon. The simulation of traverses with a six- wheeled planetary rover on Martian landscape are demonstrated with near-photoreal images, coupled with physical-realistic locomotive data under different terrains.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".