Cooperative aerial search by an innovative optimized map-sharing algorithm
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
In this paper, the problem of cooperative search and tracking by multiple flying vehicles is studied. An algorithm is proposed based on optimal planning by minimizing a suitably defined cost function. In order to define the cost function, three maps are proposed: uncertainty map, detection probability map, and emitter map. In the uncertainty map, the geometrical status of the vehicle with respect to the region is considered and its suitability is measured. The detection probability map is defined such that the group of vehicles can detect new emitters that appear in their sensors’ coverage. Finally, the emitter map is a tool to keep tracking the detected emitters with acceptable error while searching the region. The assumption that the vehicles are equipped with only one commonly used radar range indicator sensor makes the proposed algorithms more applicable in the real world for a cost-effective system. The efficiency of the proposed method from the search, detection, and tracking points of view is verified through simulations.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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