MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128921782 · doi:10.1017/s0263574714002707

Dynamic IBVS of a rotary wing UAV using line features

2014· article· en· W2128921782 on OpenAlexaff
Hui Xie, Alan F. Lynch, Martin Jägersand

Bibliographic record

VenueRobotica · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisual servoingUnderactuationComputer visionComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceRobustness (evolution)Line (geometry)Control theory (sociology)Image (mathematics)RobotControl (management)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY In this paper we propose a dynamic image-based visual servoing (IBVS) control for a rotary wing unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) which directly accounts for the vehicle's underactuated dynamic model. The motion control objective is to follow parallel lines and is motivated by power line inspection tasks where the UAV's relative position and orientation to the lines are controlled. The design is based on a virtual camera whose motion follows the onboard physical camera but which is constrained to point downwards independent of the vehicle's roll and pitch angles. A set of image features is proposed for the lines projected into the virtual camera frame. These features are chosen to simplify the interaction matrix which in turn leads to a simpler IBVS control design which is globally asymptotically stable. The proposed scheme is adaptive and therefore does not require depth estimation. Simulation results are presented to illustrate the performance of the proposed control and its robustness to calibration parameter error.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations23
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRoboticaSame topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207