MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312361566 · doi:10.1109/tnse.2022.3217460

Flocks, Mobs, and Figure Eights: Swarming as a Lemniscatic Arch

2022· article· en· W4312361566 on OpenAlexaff
Peter T. Jardine, Sidney Givigi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Network Science and Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSwarm behaviourArchSwarming (honey bee)Computer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligenceGeometryMathematical optimizationAlgorithmStructural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inspired by the natural mobbing behavior of birds, this work presents a novel, quasi-distributed swarming strategy called the Dynamic Lemniscatic Arch. It resolves the problem of producing globally-stable, evenly-spaced lemniscate (or, figure-eight) trajectories while relying on local interactions only. Such trajectories are advantageous in applications where energy consumption and mechanical strain must be minimized. Previous work in lemniscate curves has typically relied on predetermined trajectories, rather than on the emergent structure of the swarm. Furthermore, we enrich the traditional 2-dimensional lemniscate plane curve structure by forming an arch in the third dimension. This arch provides more consistent coverage in surveillance type tasks and, with minor variations in parameters, can be used to produce mobbing behavior. The technique relies on time-varying quaternion rotations linked to the positions of dynamically induced virtual agents. We provide a mathematical proof of stability, which demonstrates the swarm converges to the desired geometry. Simulations show that the strategy performs well with multiple agents and in numerous different configurations.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Network Science and EngineeringSame topicDistributed Control Multi-Agent SystemsFrench-language works237,207