Deploying an Educational Mobile Robot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study presents the development of a software solution for processing, analyzing, and visualizing sensor data collected by an educational mobile robot. The focus is on statistical analysis and identifying correlations between diverse datasets. The research utilized the PlatypOUs mobile robot platform, equipped with odometry and inertial measurement units (IMUs), to gather comprehensive motion data. To enhance the reliability and interpretability of the data, advanced data processing techniques—such as moving averages, correlation analysis, and exponential smoothing—were employed. Python-based tools, including Matplotlib and Visual Studio Code, were used for data visualization and analysis. The analysis provided key insights into the robot’s motion dynamics; specifically, its stability during linear movements and variability during turns. By applying moving average filtering and exponential smoothing, noise in the sensor data was significantly reduced, enabling clearer identification of motion patterns. Correlation analysis revealed meaningful relationships between velocity and acceleration during various motion states. These findings underscore the value of advanced data processing techniques in improving the performance and reliability of educational mobile robots. The insights gained in this pilot project contribute to the optimization of navigation algorithms and motion control systems, enhancing the robot’s future potential in STEM education applications.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".