Mobile Robot Navigation Using Hand-Drawn Maps: A Vision Language Model Approach
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
Hand-drawn maps can be used to convey navigation instructions between humans and robots in a natural and efficient manner. However, these maps can often contain inaccuracies such as scale distortions and missing landmarks which present challenges for mobile robot navigation. This paper introduces a novel Hand-drawn Map Navigation (HAM-Nav) architecture that leverages pre-trained vision language models (VLMs) for robot navigation across diverse environments, hand-drawing styles, and robot embodiments, even in the presence of map inaccuracies. HAM-Nav integrates a unique Selective Visual Association Prompting approach for topological map-based position estimation and navigation planning as well as a Predictive Navigation Plan Parser to infer missing landmarks. Extensive experiments were conducted in photorealistic simulated environments, using both wheeled and legged robots, demonstrating the effectiveness of HAM-Nav in terms of navigation success rates and Success weighted by Path Length. Furthermore, a user study in real-world environments highlighted the practical utility of hand-drawn maps for robot navigation as well as successful navigation outcomes compared against a non-hand-drawn map approach.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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