MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297688052 · doi:10.1093/jcde/qwac084

TransNav: spatial sequential transformer network for visual navigation

2022· article· en· W4297688052 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kang Zhou, Huyin Zhang, Fei Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational Design and Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMultimodal Machine Learning Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaMinistry of Natural Resources
KeywordsComputer scienceReinforcement learningArtificial intelligenceInferenceTransformerMachine learningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Visual navigation task is to steer an embodied agent finding the given target based on observation. The effective transformer from observation of the agent to visual representation determines the navigation actions and promotes more informed navigation policy. In this work, we propose a spatial sequential transformer network (SSTNet) for learning informative visual representation in deep reinforcement learning. SSTNet is composed by spatial attention probability fused model (SAF) and sequential transformer network (STNet). SAF enforces cross-modal state into visual clues in reinforcement learning. It encodes semantic information about observed objects, as well as spatial information about their location, which jointly exploiting image inter-relations. STNet generates (imagines) the next observations and makes action inference of the aspects most relevant to the target. It decodes the image intra-relations. This way, the agent learns to understand the causality between navigation actions and dynamic changes in observations. SSTNet is conditioned on an auto-regressive model on the desired reward, past states, actions, and knowledge graph. The whole navigation framework considers the local and global visual information, as well as time sequential information. Thus, it allows the agent to navigate towards the sought-after object effectively. We evaluate our model on the AI2THOR framework show that our method attains at least $10\%$ improvement of average success rate over most state-of-the-art models. Code and datasets can be found in https://github.com/zhoukang123/SDTNet_2022.

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)0.001
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational Design and EngineeringSame topicMultimodal Machine Learning ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207