DRIVE Through the Unpredictability: From a Protocol Investigating Slip to a Metric Estimating Command Uncertainty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Off-road autonomous navigation is a challenging task as it is mainly dependent on the accuracy of the motion model. Motion model performances are limited by their ability to predict the interaction between the terrain and the uncrewed ground vehicles (UGVs), which an onboard sensor can not directly measure. In this work, we propose using the Data-driven Robot Input Vector Exploration (DRIVE) protocol to standardize the data collection for system identification and characterization of the slip state space. We validated this protocol by acquiring a dataset with two platforms (from 75 kg to 470 kg) on six terrains (i.e., asphalt, grass, gravel, ice, mud, sand) for a total of 4.9 h and 14.7km. Using this data, we evaluate the DRIVE protocol’s ability to explore the velocity command space and identify the reachable velocities for terrain-robot interactions. We investigated the transfer function between the command velocity space and the resulting steady-state slip for a skid-steering mobile robots (SSMRs). An unpredictability metric is proposed to quantify a system’s ability to predict the resulting motion of a command with a single scalar, normalized between 0 and 1. Finally, we share our lessons learned on running system identification with a 470 kg UGV to help the community.
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 | 0.004 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".