MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7133297058 · doi:10.65521/ijmer.v13i1.98

Robotic Swarm Intelligence: Coordination and Collaboration in Multi-Robot Systems

2025· article· W7133297058 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal on Mechanical Engineering and Robotics · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsGreenfield Research (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSwarm roboticsSwarm behaviourAdaptabilityTask (project management)Swarm intelligenceField (mathematics)Key (lock)Robotics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Robotic swarm intelligence is a rapidly evolving field that leverages principles of decentralized control, self-organization, and emergent behavior to enable effective coordination and collaboration in multi-robot systems. Inspired by biological swarms, such as ant colonies and bird flocks, swarm robotics focuses on the collective performance of simple agents interacting locally to achieve complex tasks. This approach enhances scalability, robustness, and adaptability in dynamic and unpredictable environments. Key applications include search and rescue, environmental monitoring, industrial automation, and military operations. Recent advancements in artificial intelligence, machine learning, and communication technologies have further improved swarm decision-making, task allocation, and formation control. This paper explores the fundamental principles, coordination strategies, and challenges in robotic swarm intelligence, highlighting future directions for optimizing collaboration in autonomous multi-robot systems.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it