Collision Avoidance Method for Autonomous Ships Based on Modified Velocity Obstacle and Collision Risk Index
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A novel real-time collision avoidance method for autonomous ships based on modified velocity obstacle (VO) algorithm and grey cloud model is proposed. A typical VO algorithm is used to judge whether there is a collision risk for ships in the potential collision area (PCA). Then, in order to quantify the collision risk of ships in different encounter situations within the PCA and trigger a prompt warning of danger of collision, this study sets up a novel collision risk assessment method based on asymmetric grey cloud model (AGC). It can effectively consider the randomness, ambiguity, and incompleteness of the information in the ship collision risk evaluation process. Moreover, reachable collision-free velocity sets under different encounter situations and optimal steering angle model are constructed. A real-time collision avoidance method based on modified VO algorithm and manoeuvring motion characteristics of vessels is put forward. In this model, various constraints are considered including the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREGs), ship manoeuvrability, and ordinary practice of seaman. Finally, several case studies are carried out to verify the performance and reliability of the collision avoidance model. The results show that the proposed method can not only effectively identify and quantify the collision risk in real-time but also offer proper collision-free solutions for autonomous ships.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".