MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1505141421 · doi:10.1109/med.2015.7158834

Incorporating feedback predictions for optimized UAV attack mission planning

2015· article· en· W1505141421 on OpenAlexaff
Peter T. Jardine, Sidney Givigi, Aboelmagd Noureldin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdversaryControl theory (sociology)Model predictive controlComputer scienceMATLABCollision avoidanceMotion planningVehicle dynamicsAffine transformationControl (management)EngineeringAerospace engineeringRobotMathematicsArtificial intelligenceComputer securityCollision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) motion planning for ground attack missions involving enemy defenses. The UAV dynamics are modelled as a unicycle, linearized using dynamic extension and extended over a finite horizon as a piece-wise affine function. This is then formulated as a constrained, convex optimization problem in the form of Model Predictive Control (MPC) using closed-loop feedback predictions. Avoidance of enemy defenses is achieved using linear inequality constraints. The design is tested in a simulated ground attack scenario involving a layered enemy defense system using MATLAB. Preliminary results demonstrate the feasibility of using MPC to guide a UAV in ground attack missions involving complex enemy defenses.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Control Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207