MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2465194975 · doi:10.1145/2897824.2925980

Generating dynamically feasible trajectories for quadrotor cameras

2016· article· en· W2465194975 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mike Roberts, Pat Hanrahan

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHuman Motion and Animation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTrajectoryComputer scienceSolverTrajectory optimizationRange (aeronautics)Computer visionDiscretizationAlgorithmControl theory (sociology)Artificial intelligenceControl (management)MathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When designing trajectories for quadrotor cameras, it is important that the trajectories respect the dynamics and physical limits of quadrotor hardware. We refer to such trajectories as being feasible . In this paper, we introduce a fast and user-friendly algorithm for generating feasible quadrotor camera trajectories. Our algorithm takes as input an infeasible trajectory designed by a user, and produces as output a feasible trajectory that is as similar as possible to the user's input. By design, our algorithm does not change the spatial layout or visual contents of the input trajectory. Instead, our algorithm guarantees the feasibility of the output trajectory by re-timing the input trajectory, perturbing its timing as little as possible while remaining within velocity and control force limits. Our choice to perturb the timing of a shot, while leaving the spatial layout and visual contents of the shot intact, leads to a well-behaved non-convex optimization problem that can be solved at interactive rates. We implement our algorithm in an open-source tool for designing quadrotor camera shots, where we achieve interactive performance across a wide range of camera trajectories. We demonstrate that our algorithm is between 25x and 45x faster than a spacetime constraints approach implemented using a commercially available solver. As we scale to more finely discretized trajectories, this performance gap widens, with our algorithm outperforming spacetime constraints by between 90x and 180x. Finally, we fly 5 feasible trajectories generated by our algorithm on a real quadrotor camera, producing video footage that is faithful to Google Earth shot previews, even when the trajectories are at the quadrotor's physical limits.

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)0.002
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations57
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicHuman Motion and AnimationFrench-language works237,207