Coordinated Multi-Robot Exploration using Reinforcement Learning
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exploring an unknown environment by multiple autonomous robots is a long-studied problem in robotics. The agents need to coordinate the exploration to minimize the overlapping region and avoid interference with each other. This is particularly challenging in decentralized execution, where no central system guides the exploration. In such scenarios, agents need to incorporate temporal planning and the intentions of other agents into the decision-making process. In this work, we focus on several challenges involved in multi-UAV exploration in unseen, unstructured, and cluttered environments. Consequently, we propose a Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (MARL) based framework wherein agents learn the effective strategy to allocate and explore the environment. We evaluate the performance of our proposed framework in terms of average distance traveled, percentage of redundant exploration, and the rate of exploration against a classical approach.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 it