MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019071905 · doi:10.1109/acc.2014.6858619

Using Linear Model Predictive Control via Feedback Linearization for dynamic encirclement

2014· article· en· W2019071905 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdaptive Control of Nonlinear Systems
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development CanadaRoyal Military College of CanadaQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Feedback linearizationComputer scienceModel predictive controlLinearizationIdentification (biology)Control (management)Linear systemControl engineeringEngineeringNonlinear systemArtificial intelligenceMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) team formed from two or more UAVs is used in the autonomous encirclement of a stationary target in simulation. The encirclement tactic is defined as the situation in which a target is surrounded by a UAV team in formation. This tactic can be employed by a team of UAVs to neutralize a target by restricting its movement. A combination of Linear Model Predictive Control (LMPC) and Feedback Linearization (FL) is implemented on a team of UAVs in order to accomplish dynamic encirclement. The linear plant, representing each UAV, is found through System Identification then linearized using an FL technique. The contributions of this paper lay in the application of LMPC and FL to the problem of encirclement using an autonomous team of UAVs in simulation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.925
Threshold uncertainty score0.836

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.249
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdaptive Control of Nonlinear SystemsFrench-language works237,207