MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401023659 · doi:10.24963/ijcai.2024/766

Boost Embodied AI Models with Robust Compression Boundary

2024· preprint· en· W4401023659 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMetaheuristic Optimization Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersEusko Jaurlaritza
KeywordsReinforcement learningComputer scienceTravelling salesman problemCombinatorial optimizationSolverSet (abstract data type)Optimization problemLocal optimumDomain (mathematical analysis)Artificial intelligenceMathematical optimizationTheoretical computer scienceAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid improvement of deep learning models with the integration of the physical world has dramatically improved embodied AI capabilities. Meanwhile, the powerful embodied AI models and their scales place an increasing burden on deployment efficiency. The efficiency issue is more apparent on embodied AI platforms than on data centers because they have more limited computational resources and memory bandwidth. Meanwhile, most embodied AI scenarios, like autonomous driving and robotics, are more sensitive to fast responses. Theoretically, the traditional model compression techniques can help embodied AI models with more efficient computation, lower memory and energy consumption, and reduced latency. Because the embodied AI models are expected to interact with the physical world, the corresponding compressed models are also expected to resist natural corruption caused by real-world events such as noise, blur, weather conditions, and even adversarial corruption. This paper explores the novel paradigm to boost the efficiency of the embodied AI models and the robust compression boundary. The efficacy of our method has been proven to find the optimal balance between accuracy, efficiency, and robustness in real-world conditions.

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)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.251 · 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
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 topicMetaheuristic Optimization Algorithms ResearchFrench-language works237,207