Control and Learning for Robotic Excavation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite a large body of research and engineering work in robotic excavation, spanning decades, commercially viable systems for fully autonomous excavation are still in their infancy. The challenge is that performance is strongly influenced by the conditions of interaction between the excavator and the material, which are typically unknown and changing throughout an excavation process. For example, material such as fragmented rock, is not homogeneous in size and composition, can be wet and sticky, or dry, depending on local factors, and it inherently moves and exposes new hidden material that is not visible prior to executing the excavation process. Thus, a fully autonomous solution for robotic excavation requires adaptation to these changing conditions in order to achieve consistent bucket filling performance. \n \nThe robotic excavation research presented in this thesis focuses on the development and study of control and learning approaches for autonomous loading of fragmented rock using robotic load-haul-dump (LHD) machines, which are utilized in underground mining; although, the developed approaches are applicable to surface loaders as well. Using an admittance-based dig control strategy for autonomous loading---which uses force feedback to regulate motion commands to a loader's bucket actuator for autonomous digging and loading---as a base control framework, preliminary field experiments are conducted with a 14-tonne capacity robotic LHD machine to gain insights into the science of the autonomous loading process. These insights are used to improve the overall dig controller design, which increases the controller's robustness and facilitates consistent bucket filling performance. This robust and consistent base control framework enables the use of simple learning algorithms to adapt the controller to changing material characteristics. An iterative learning algorithm is developed and validated, which adapts control parameters to track a desired bucket fill weight at each excavation pass. A material classification methodology is also developed and validated, which uses information in the controller's force feedback signal to classify excavation materials to further improve learning and adaptation. Compared to AI-based approaches that require many training samples and advanced computing, the developed control and learning approaches have practical significance as demonstrated through the full-scale field experiments.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".