MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2328441893 · doi:10.2514/6.2007-6410

Cooperative and Deceptive Planning of Multiformations of Networked UCAVs in Adversarial Urban Environments

2007· article· en· W2328441893 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

VenueAIAA Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference and Exhibit · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdversarial systemComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an online decision policy built upon Markov decision processes for the cooperative path planning and weapons management of multiformations of UCAVs. Such cooperative control strategy provides optimal routing and weapons management despite conflicting objectives of opposing teams. The UCAVs constitute the blue team. They have for objective to reach prescribed tactical target locations, sequentially, from a common starting point, by following possibly different paths across an adversarial urban environment, within a prescribed time window and with maximum destruction capability once at close range. The UCAVs face an adversarial red team, which is composed of static ground units that can engage any nearby UCAV. The blue team’s planning thus aims at minimizing damages while maximizing the total number of remaining weapons at the time the tactical targets are reached. The blue team is modeled as controlled Markov processes with states expressing formations survival status and locations. The blue and red teams play the roles of cost-function minimizer and maximizer, respectively. Based on the assumption of known transition matrices, the worst-case minimization objective of the blue team is formulated as a finite-time optimization, which is solved by means of a dynamic programming equation with value function evolving according to a graph of feasible paths. Once the optimization problem is solved, the resulting decision policy takes the form of a lookup table. Online implementation necessitates that formations share information through a communications network. Real-time simulations show that the cooperative path planning and weapons management policy provides, on average, an improvement in performance when compared with single-formation routing. Furthermore, this high-level decision policy integrates seamlessly with robust formation flight control and decentralized team-level fault detection schemes proposed recently by the authors.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.513
Threshold uncertainty score0.600

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.233 · 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