MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Velocity Planning for Multi-Vehicle Systems via Distributed Optimization

2023· article· en· W4391769526 on OpenAlexaff
Shuyuan Wang, Hang Yu, Shuai Yuan, Shengbo Eben Li, Zepeng Ning

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work presents a distributed velocity planning strategy for multi-vehicle cooperation along pre-defined paths. Specifically, we consider a class of tasks where multiple vehicles must navigate given paths with conflict zones (e.g., merging and crossing) as fast as possible without any inner collisions. Given the paths, the biggest challenge for velocity planning is to create collision avoidance constraints without complete spatio-temporal information. To overcome the challenge, a scheme is proposed to project collision-related information from coordinate space to 1-D space with geometry-based safety guarantees. To enhance the ability to deal with medium-and large-scale problems, the alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM) is introduced. Unlike classic ideas of applying distributed optimization, we formulate ADMM in a semi-centralized, semi-parallel fashion instead of a fully distributed fashion. In this way, a trade-off between overall performance and computational efficiency can be achieved. We evaluate our distributed planning strategy through simulations in multiple cases <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">1</sup> <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">1</sup> Video of the results is available at https://youtu.be/GR6BwFTLErw. The results demonstrate that our method not only plans collision-free paths but also balances between overall performance and computational load.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.443

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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 topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207