Motion planning for multi-link robots with artificial potential fields and modified simulated annealing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this thesis we present a hybrid control methodology using Artificial Potential Fields (APF) integrated with a modified Simulated Annealing (SA) optimization algorithm for motion planning of a multi-link robots team. The principle of this work is based on the locomotion of a snake where subsequent links follow the trace of the head. The proposed algorithm uses the APF method which provides simple, efficient and effective path planning and the modified SA is applied in order for the robots to recover from a local minima. Modifications to the SA algorithm improve the performance of the algorithm and reduce convergence time.\nValidation on a three-link snake robot shows that the derived control laws from the motion planning algorithm that combine APF and SA can successfully navigate the robot to reach its destination, while avoiding collisions with multiple obstacles and other robots in its path as well as recover from local minima. To improve the performance of the algorithm, the gradient descent method is replaced by Newton???s method which helps in reducing the zigzagging phenomenon in gradient descent method while the robot moves in the vicinity of an obstacle.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".