MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Auction-based solution for the ordering problem in robotic self-assembly

2023· article· en· W4378190948 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicModular Robots and Swarm Intelligence
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobotComputer scienceSwarm behaviourSwarm roboticsTask (project management)Process (computing)Selection (genetic algorithm)Distributed computingArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autonomous construction is a process that uses robots to build structures. In those, the self-assembly denotes the robotic construction solutions where the robots are used as the structure parts. A common problem in self-assembly strategies is that given a homogeneous group of robots (a swarm), how the next robot to assemble a structure can be selected. Such selection can be even more complex if there are multiple structures being assembled simultaneously by the same group of robots. In this paper, we model the selection of robots as a task assignment problem, and we propose an auction-based method to compute an order of which robots will move to structures being assembled. Our algorithms are validated using mathematical proofs and simulations. The analysis of the results shows that our algorithms outperform a baseline selection method while guaranteeing communication between robots in the swarm. Moreover, our solution is shown to be power efficient, reducing battery consumption while the robot is in an idle state, waiting to be assigned.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.232

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicModular Robots and Swarm IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207