Fault-Resilience Role Engine for an Autonomous Cooperative Multi-Robot System using E-CARGO
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In safety-critical applications, where several mobile robots and autonomous agents are being utilized for a mission, a fault-resilience behavior of the system is necessary. The fault resilience mechanism mostly uses the robot’s redundancy and tasks reassignment to recover malfunctioning and increase operating efficiency. The E-CARGO (Environments - Classes, Agents, Roles, Groups, and Objects) model designed for the Role-Based Collaboration (RBC) approach has been used successfully on cooperative Multi-Robot Systems (MRSs). Role-based characteristics of E-CARGO will facilitate cooperative decision-making and simplify handling failure. This paper develops an extended E-CARGO model for a fault resilience role engine. Agents use factor graphs to update the process role and manage the potential failure in each time step. We apply hybrid control in this paper. By “hybrid” we mean that evaluating and assigning initial roles are centralized, and role-playing is decentralized based on the local observations. The RBC life cycle and a Bayesian consensus will maintain fault resilience behaviors. Potential failure can be identified in a Bayesian way by updating agents’ reliability and calling the central unit to assign new process roles to guarantee robustness. Simulation experiments show that the proposed role engine can increase performance and tolerate failures in multi-robot path planning scenarios.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".