Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2605.13208

Calibration-Free Gas Source Localization with Mobile Robots: Source Term Estimation Based on Concentration Measurement Ranking

Wanting Jin·Agatha Duranceau·İzzet Kağan Erünsal·Alcherio Martinoli
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Efficient Gas Source Localization (GSL) in real-world settings is crucial, especially in emergency scenarios. Mobile robots equipped with low-cost, in-situ gas sensors offer a safer alternative to human inspection in hazardous environments. Probabilistic algorithms enhance GSL efficiency with scattered gas measurements by comparing gas concentration measurements gathered by robots to physical dispersion models. However, accurately deriving gas concentrations from data acquired with low-cost sensors is challenging due to the nonlinear sensor response, environmental dependencies (e.g., humidity, temperature, and other gas influences), and robot motion. Mitigating these disturbance factors requires frequent sensor calibration in controlled environments, which is often impractical for real-world deployments. To overcome these issues, we propose a novel feature extraction algorithm that leverages the relative ranking of gas measurements within the dynamically accumulated dataset. By comparing the rank differences between gathered and modeled values, we estimate the probabilistic distribution of source locations across the entire environment. We validate our approach in high-fidelity simulations and physical experiments, demonstrating consistent localization accuracy with uncalibrated gas sensors. Compared to existing methods, our technique eliminates the need for gas sensor calibration, making it well-suited for real-world applications.

Explore related subjects

cs.RO

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Wanting Jin, Agatha Duranceau, İzzet Kağan Erünsal, Alcherio Martinoli. 2026-05-13. Calibration-Free Gas Source Localization with Mobile Robots: Source Term Estimation Based on Concentration Measurement Ranking. https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.13208

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

IMLE-VLA: Fast Single-Step Action Generation for Vision-Language-Action Policies

Vision-language-action (VLA) policies leverage pretrained vision-language backbones to achieve strong cross-task generalization. A leading design couples this backbone with a dedicated continuous action head trained via diffusion or flow matching. However, such heads rely on iterative multi-step sampling, for example 10 Euler steps in $\pi_{0.5}$. This creates an inference bottleneck that produces stop-and-go movement in the robot and slower task completion. We introduce IMLE-VLA, which replaces the iterative action head with a single-step conditional generator trained via conditional Implicit Maximum Likelihood Estimation (cIMLE). The cIMLE objective promotes multimodal action coverage, avoiding the mode collapse of naive regression heads while eliminating multi-step sampling entirely. When IMLE-VLA is applied to $\pi_{0.5}$, it increases inference frequency 3.67x (55 Hz vs. 15 Hz), enabling up to 11x higher action throughput. On the 40-task LIBERO benchmark, IMLE-VLA achieves the highest average success rate (98.0%) among all baselines while leading in inference frequency. Under the test-time perturbations of LIBERO-plus, IMLE-VLA retains $\pi_{0.5}$'s robustness while other baselines degrade sharply, confirming that the cIMLE head preserves generalization. Real-world experiments on a Franka Emika Panda across four tasks demonstrate smoother motion (2.2x to 3.0x lower jerk) and faster task completion, with IMLE-VLA outperforming $\pi_{0.5}$ on every task and reducing average VLA inference time per episode by 3.9x to 6.6x. Videos and code are available at https://kianhk6.github.io/IMLE-VLA/

cs.RO↗
arXiv2026

ObstaDiff: Generalizable Diffusion Policy Learning via Obstacle-aware Representations

Imitation learning has achieved impressive results in robotic manipulation, yet most existing approaches assume clean backgrounds and lack explicit mechanisms for obstacle-aware motion generation. Extending such policies to cluttered, real-world scenes with unstructured obstacles remains a key generalization challenge. We present ObstaDiff, a decomposed diffusion-policy framework with a lightweight obstacle-aware visual encoder. ObstaDiff extracts a structured target-obstacle-background representation, enabling the downstream alignment policy to generate end-effector trajectories toward a target-centered bottleneck pose while reasoning about surrounding obstacles. We evaluate ObstaDiff on 61 real-robot greenhouse trials per method (366 executions in total). ObstaDiff achieves 75.41% average task success and 8.20% average obstacle collision rate, outperforming representative imitation-learning baselines and improving generalization in cluttered agricultural scenes.

cs.RO↗
arXiv2026

Testing Between the Test Cases: Proving End-to-End Steering in Conditions You Never Drove

AI-based automated vehicle testing is challenging because a model that passes every test condition can still fail in the real world. Formal verification offers a way to directly address this gap. On a simulated highway and an arterial road we trained two small end-to-end steering networks each in CARLA, one on clear conditions alone and one on clear, fog, night and low sun. All four models were driven against a 2.19 ft lane-departure budget. Without driving again, we used bound propagation, a formal method that reads the trained weights, to compute how far steering can drift at every disturbance strength between two captured images. One calculation covers more than a campaign could drive: on the arterial it spans 133 poses, where ten intensities each would be 10^133 combinations, in minutes on one GPU. Not only did formal verification find conditions that broke the clear-trained policy without simulation testing, it provided some preliminary evidence for potential failures between the test cases. Our overall conclusion is that formal verification is a viable complement to simulation, and could be adopted as a part of verification and validation for automated driving.

cs.RO↗