MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145396857 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2009.5090303

Path planning for multiple Unmanned Aerial Vehicles using genetic algorithms

2009· article· en· W2145396857 on OpenAlexaff
Howard Li, Yi Fu, Khalid Elgazzar, Liam Paull

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMotion planningComputer sciencePlan (archaeology)AerospaceMATLABProcess (computing)Genetic algorithmPath (computing)Data collectionReal-time computingSystems engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineeringMachine learningAerospace engineeringRobotComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the future, autonomous Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) need to work in teams to share information and coordinate activities. The private sector and government agencies have implemented UAVs for home-land security, reconnaissance, surveillance, data collection, urban planning, and geometrics engineering. Significant research is in progress to support the decision-making process for a Multi-Agent System (MAS) consisting of multiple UAVs. This paper investigates fundamental issues in path planning for multiple UAVs. MASs with multiple UAVs are typical distributed systems. We propose to use genetic algorithms to plan multiple paths for multiple UAVs. Simulation technologies have become important to the development of aerospace vehicles. In this research, we verify the proposed path planning approach using Matlab. Simulation results demonstrate that the proposed approach is able to plan multiple paths for UAVs successfully.

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)0.001
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207