Multi-Objective Optimization of RTAB-Map parameters using Genetic Algorithm for indoor 2D SLAM
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently, Robot Operating System (ROS) provides multiple packages to implement different Simultaneous Localization and Mapping (SLAM) approaches. To effectively obtain sensor data, these packages use parameters whose values are set from prior knowledge and experience with robots and SLAM. In this paper, using a Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm (MOGA) to optimize the values for these parameters is proposed. MOGA allows trade-offs between the objectives using Pareto dominance techniques. Three parameters from the RTAB-Map package are considered for optimization using three different MOGA mechanisms, Dominance Count, Dominance Rank and Switching Fitness. The quality of the map generated for every set of parameters is taken as the indicator of its performance. The number of corners, number of contours and the proportion of occupied cells in the map are used as quantitative measures of map quality. Finally, results obtained from testing the algorithm in simulation are used to test a Quanser QBot2 robot.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it