Adaptive Sampling of Latent Phenomena using Heterogeneous Robot Teams (ASLaP-HR)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we present an online adaptive planning strategy for a team of robots with heterogeneous sensors to sample from a latent spatial field using a learned model for decision making. Current robotic sampling methods seek to gather information about an observable spatial field. However, many applications, such as environmental monitoring and precision agriculture, involve phenomena that are not directly observable or are costly to measure, called latent phenomena. In our approach, we seek to reason about the latent phenomenon in real-time by effectively sampling the observable spatial fields using a team of robots with heterogeneous sensors, where each robot has a distinct sensor to measure a different observable field. The information gain is estimated using a learned model that maps from the observable spatial fields to the latent phenomenon. This model captures aleatoric uncertainty in the relationship to allow for information theoretic measures. Additionally, we explicitly consider the correlations among the observable spatial fields, capturing the relationship between sensor types whose observations are not independent. We show it is possible to learn these correlations, and investigate the impact of the learned correlation models on the performance of our sampling approach. Through our qualitative and quantitative results, we illustrate that empirically learned correlations improve the overall sampling efficiency of the team. We simulate our approach using a data set of sensor measurements collected on Lac Hertel, in Quebec, which we make publicly available.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".