MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392456128 · doi:10.1061/9780784485224.076

Self-Optimization of Robot Design for Navigating in Ceiling Systems

2024· article· en· W4392456128 on OpenAlexaff
Kangkang Duan, Zhengbo Zou

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCeiling (cloud)Computer scienceRobotHuman–computer interactionArtificial intelligenceEngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Suspended ceiling systems are complex and heterogeneous due to the combination of different components. Therefore, it is hard for robots to navigate in these environments without expert designed robot morphology. However, the cost of robot design is high since ceiling systems vary from building to building. Currently, some studies demonstrate that robots can evolve like creatures so that they can adapt themselves to different environments through evolutionary strategies. Inspired by the assembly of LEGO bricks, we applied graph grammar methods to optimize robot design in suspended ceiling systems. The basic idea is that the robot can find the optimized structures assembled from elementary components for themselves without any human intervention. Robots were trained in four common ceiling environments reflecting the influence of typical terrain and obstructions (e.g., ducts). Results show that different suspended ceiling system significantly affects the configuration of robots and robots can successfully evolve specific shapes to improve their acclimatization. This paper marks the first attempt at performing robot evolution in the context of facilities management and is expected to evoke future discussions in robot design in more civil engineering tasks.

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)0.001
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 score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.274

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.253 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207