MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389984096 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2312.10918

Visualizing High-Dimensional Configuration Spaces: A Comprehensive Analytical Approach

2023· preprint· en· W4389984096 on OpenAlexaff
Jorge Ocampo Jimenez, Wael Suleiman

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicModular Robots and Swarm Intelligence
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRobotCollisionLeverage (statistics)Representation (politics)Motion (physics)Theoretical computer scienceArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmComputer visionProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The representation of a Configuration Space C plays a vital role in accelerating the finding of a collision-free path for sampling-based motion planners where the majority of computation time is spent in collision checking of states. Traditionally, planners evaluate C's representations through limited evaluations of collision-free paths using the collision checker or by reducing the dimensionality of C for visualization. However, a collision checker may indicate high accuracy even when only a subset of the original C is represented; limiting the motion planner's ability to find paths comparable to those in the original C. Additionally, dealing with high-dimensional Cs is challenging, as qualitative evaluations become increasingly difficult in dimensions higher than three, where reduced-dimensional C evaluation may decrease accuracy in cluttered environments. In this paper, we present a novel approach for visualizing representations of high-dimensional Cs of manipulator robots in a 2D format. We provide a new tool for qualitative evaluation of high-dimensional Cs approximations without reducing the original dimension. This enhances our ability to compare the accuracy and coverage of two different high-dimensional Cs. Leveraging the kinematic chain of manipulator robots and human color perception, we show the efficacy of our method using a 7-degree-of-freedom CS of a manipulator robot. This visualization offers qualitative insights into the joint boundaries of the robot and the coverage of collision state combinations without reducing the dimensionality of the original data. To support our claim, we conduct a numerical evaluation of the proposed visualization.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.139
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.081 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicModular Robots and Swarm IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207