Learning scalable and efficient communication policies for multi-robot collision avoidance
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
Abstract Decentralized multi-robot systems typically perform coordinated motion planning by constantly broadcasting their intentions to avoid collisions. However, the risk of collision between robots varies as they move and communication may not always be needed. This paper presents an efficient communication method that addresses the problem of “when” and “with whom” to communicate in multi-robot collision avoidance scenarios. In this approach, each robot learns to reason about other robots’ states and considers the risk of future collisions before asking for the trajectory plans of other robots. We introduce a new neural architecture for the learned communication policy which allows our method to be scalable. We evaluate and verify the proposed communication strategy in simulation with up to twelve quadrotors, and present results on the zero-shot generalization/robustness capabilities of the policy in different scenarios. We demonstrate that our policy (learned in a simulated environment) can be successfully transferred to real robots.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it