MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

On Legible and Predictable Robot Navigation in Multi-Agent Environments

2023· article· en· W4383097456 on OpenAlexaff
Jean-Luc Bastarache, Christopher Nielsen, Stephen L. Smith

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegibilityPredictabilityComputer scienceRobotGeneralizationArtificial intelligenceHuman–computer interactionComputer visionMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Legible motion is intent-expressive, which when employed during social robot navigation, allows others to quickly infer the intended avoidance strategy. Predictable motion matches an observer's expectation which, during navigation, allows others to confidently carryout the interaction. In this work, we present a navigation framework capable of reasoning on its legibility and predictability with respect to dynamic interactions, e.g., a passing side. Our approach generalizes the previously formalized notions of legibility and predictability by allowing dynamic goal regions in order to navigate in dynamic environments. This generalization also allows us to quantitatively evaluate the legibility and the predictability of trajectories with respect to navigation interactions. Our approach is shown to promote legible behavior in ambiguous scenarios and predictable behavior in unambiguous scenarios. In a multi-agent environment, this yields an increase in safety while remaining competitive in terms of goal-efficiency when compared to other robot navigation planners in multi-agent environments. The code of this work is made publicly available1.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReinforcement Learning in RoboticsFrench-language works237,207