Dissipative Avoidance Feedback for Reactive Navigation Under Second-Order Dynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper addresses the problem of autonomous robot navigation in unknown, obstacle-filled environments with second-order dynamics by proposing a Dissipative Avoidance Feedback (DAF). Compared to the Artificial Potential Field (APF), which primarily uses repulsive forces based on position, DAF employs a dissipative feedback mechanism that accounts for both position and velocity, contributing to smoother and more natural obstacle avoidance. The proposed continuously differentiable controller solves the motion-to-goal problem while guaranteeing collision-free navigation by using the robot’s state and local obstacle distance information. We show that the controller guarantees safe navigation in generic n-dimensional environments and achieves Almost Global Asymptotic Stability (AGAS) under certain curvature conditions. Designed for real-time implementation, DAF requires only locally measured data from limited-range sensors (e.g., LiDAR, depth cameras), making it particularly effective for robots navigating unknown workspaces. Simulations in 2D and 3D environments are conducted to validate the theoretical results and showcase the effectiveness of our 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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".