MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Allocation of Formation Control Tasks Using Delaunay Triangulation and Tetrahedralization

2024· article· en· W4400076981 on OpenAlexaff
Reza Babazadeh, Rastko R. Šelmić, Barış Fi̇dan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDelaunay triangulationConstrained Delaunay triangulationComputer scienceBowyer–Watson algorithmTriangulationControl (management)Voronoi diagramPitteway triangulationMathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper studies the task allocation for the formation control of multi-agent systems with directed graph topologies, where agents are required to form and preserve a specific geometric shape. A directed graph is said to be persistent if it is constraint-consistent and the underlying undirected graph is rigid. A formation of agents is constraint-consistent if every agent can satisfy all its distance constraints. In this context, based on Delaunay triangulation in 2-D and Delaunay tetrahedralization in 3-D space, we propose a novel task allocation algorithm applicable to distance-based formation topologies that guarantees constraint consistency of a desired formation of agents. Given the desired shape - a framework in space - the algorithm uses the Delaunay operations to build a network of rigid triangles/tetrahedrons representing the desired formation topology. The algorithm uses the shortest Euclidean distance-based task assignment to establish a desired topology in the form of directed triangulated or directed trilateral Laman graphs. The source agent of each edge is responsible for preserving the desired distance to the sink agent. The output of the proposed algorithm is a minimally persistent graph in 2-D or a minimally structurally persistent graph in 3-D. Examples are provided to demonstrate and verify the effectiveness of the proposed method.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.557
Threshold uncertainty score0.331

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.210 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeological Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207