Rotorcraft aerial robot-challenges and solutions
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Georgia Tech Aerial Robotics Team has been working on autonomous control of an unmanned aerial vehicle for three years as both a research project and a competition entry. The three annual International Autonomous Aerial Vehicle Competitions (1991-93) have attracted university teams from across the country as well as from Europe, Canada, and Asia. At the third annual competition in June 1993, the Georgia Tech system was awarded first place for demonstrating completely autonomous flight including a safe landing. This success is a result of overcoming numerous challenges faced white creating a guided automatic flight control system for a small unmanned vehicle. The 1993 entry was refined through early and consistent test flights and the application of lessons learned from previous years. The Georgia Tech Aerial Robotics System (GTARS) features an on-board flight control computer, a six axis sensor suite, an off-board mission planning station, a vision tracking system, and a modified model helicopter of conventional configuration. Other features of the system include remote pilot control with safety override switch, two way telemetry data link, and a tethered autonomous sub-vehicle.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">></ETX>
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it