Distributed iterative learning control for a team of quadrotors
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 goal of this work is to enable a team of quadrotors to learn how to accurately track a desired trajectory while holding a given formation. We solve this problem in a distributed manner, where each vehicle has only access to the information of its neighbors. The desired trajectory is only available to one (or few) vehicles. We present a distributed iterative learning control (ILC) approach where each vehicle learns from the experience of its own and its neighbors' previous task repetitions, and adapts its feedforward input to improve performance. Existing algorithms are extended in theory to make them more applicable to real-world experiments. In particular, we prove stability for any causal learning function with gains chosen according to a simple scalar condition. Previous proofs were restricted to a specific learning function that only depends on the tracking error derivative (D-type ILC). Our extension provides more degrees of freedom in the ILC design and, as a result, better performance can be achieved. We also show that stability is not affected by a linear dynamic coupling between neighbors. This allows us to use an additional consensus feedback controller to compensate for non-repetitive disturbances. Experiments with two quadrotors attest the effectiveness of the proposed distributed multi-agent ILC approach. This is the first work to show distributed ILC in experiment.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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