Proprioception Is All You Need: Terrain Classification for Boreal Forests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent works in field robotics highlighted the importance of resiliency against different types of terrains. Boreal forests, in particular, are home to many mobility-impeding terrains that should be considered for off-road autonomous navigation. Also, being one of the largest land biomes on Earth, boreal forests are an area where autonomous vehicles are expected to become increasingly common. In this paper, we address the issue of classifying boreal terrains by introducing BorealTC, a publicly available dataset for proprioceptive-based terrain classification (TC). Recorded with a Husky A200, our dataset contains 116 min of Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU), motor current, and wheel odometry data, focusing on typical boreal forest terrains, notably snow, ice, and silty loam. Combining our dataset with another dataset from the literature, we evaluate both a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) and the novel state space model (SSM)-based Mamba architecture on a TC task. We show that while CNN outperforms Mamba on each separate dataset, Mamba achieves greater accuracy when trained on a combination of both. In addition, we demonstrate that Mamba’s learning capacity is greater than a CNN for increasing amounts of data. We show that the combination of two TC datasets yields a latent space that can be interpreted with the properties of the terrains. We also discuss the implications of merging datasets on classification. Our source code and dataset are publicly available online: https://github.com/norlab-ulaval/BorealTC.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".