MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1765178018 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1503.07253

Safe Platooning of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles via Reachability

2015· preprint· en· W1765178018 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mo Chen, Qie Hu, Casey Mackin, Jaime F. Fisac, Claire J. Tomlin

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2015
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAir Force Office of Scientific ResearchOffice of Naval ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFundación Bancaria Caixa d'Estalvis i Pensions de BarcelonaMultidisciplinary University Research InitiativeUniversity of PennsylvaniaNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsReachabilityLivenessPlatoonComputer scienceSet (abstract data type)Controller (irrigation)Distributed computingControl (management)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, there has been immense interest in using unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for civilian operations such as package delivery, firefighting, and fast disaster response. As a result, UAV traffic management systems are needed to support potentially thousands of UAVs flying simultaneously in the airspace, in order to ensure their liveness and safety requirements are met. Hamilton-Jacobi (HJ) reachability is a powerful framework for providing conditions under which these requirements can be met, and for synthesizing the optimal controller for meeting them. However, due to the curse of dimensionality, HJ reachability is only tractable for a small number of vehicles if their set of maneuvers is unrestricted. In this paper, we define a platoon to be a group of UAVs in a single-file formation. We model each vehicle as a hybrid system with modes corresponding to its role in the platoon, and specify the set of allowed maneuvers in each mode to make the analysis tractable. We propose several liveness controllers based on HJ reachability, and wrap a safety controller, also based on HJ reachability, around the liveness controllers. For a single altitude range, our approach guarantees safety for one safety breach; in the unlikely event of multiple safety breaches, safety can be guaranteed over multiple altitude ranges. We demonstrate the satisfaction of liveness and safety requirements through simulations of three common scenarios.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.106 · 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

Citations13
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207