MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389966182 · doi:10.1016/j.fmre.2023.10.015

Developing inverse motion planning technique for autonomous vehicles using integral nonlinear constraints

2023· article· en· W4389966182 on OpenAlexafffund
Maksym Diachuk, Said M. Easa

Bibliographic record

VenueFundamental Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNonlinear systemMotion (physics)InverseComputer scienceMotion planningControl theory (sociology)MathematicsArtificial intelligencePhysicsRobotGeometryControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study considers issues of elaborating and validating a technique of autonomous vehicle motion planning based on sequential trajectory and speed optimization. This method includes components such as representing sought-for functions by finite elements (FE), vehicle kinematic model, sequential quadratic programming for nonlinear constrained optimization, and Gaussian N-point quadrature integration. The primary novelty consists of using the inverse approach for obtaining vehicle trajectory and speed. The curvature and speed are represented by integrated polynomials to reduce the number of unknowns. For this, piecewise functions with two and three degrees of freedom (DOF) are implemented through FE nodal parameters. The technique ensures higher differentiability compared to the needed in the geometric and kinematic equations. Thus, the generated reference curves are characterized by simple and unambiguous forms. The latter fits best the control accuracy and efficiency during the motion tracking phase. Another advantage is replacing the nodal linear equality constraints with integral nonlinear ones. This ensures the non-violation of boundary limits within each FE and not only in nodes. The optimization technique implies that the spatial and time variables must be found separately and staged. The trajectory search is accomplished in the restricted allowable zone composed by superposing an area inside the external and internal boundaries, based on keeping safe distances, excluding areas for moving obstacles. Thus, this study compares two models that use two and three nodal DOF on optimization quality, stability, and rapidity in real-time applications. The simulation example shows numerous graph results of geometric and kinematic parameters with smoothed curves up to the highest derivatives. Finally, the conclusions are made on the efficiency and quality of prognosis, outlining the similarities and differences between the two applied models.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.299
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.153 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFundamental ResearchSame topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207