Semi‐decentralized nonlinear cooperative control strategies for a network of heterogeneous autonomous underwater vehicles
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
Summary In this paper, we develop nonlinear distributed or semi‐decentralized cooperative control schemes for a team of heterogeneous autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs). The objective is to have the network of AUVs follow a desired trajectory, while the agents maintain a desired formation when there is a virtual leader whose position information is only available and known to a very small subset of the agents. The virtual leader does not receive any feedback and information from the other agents and the agents only communicate with their nearest neighboring agents. It is assumed that the model parameters associated with each vehicle/agent is different, although the order of the agents is the same. The developed and proposed nonlinear distributed cooperative control schemes are based on the dynamic surface control methodology for a network of heterogeneous autonomous vehicles with uncertainties. The development and investigation of the dynamic surface control methodology for a team of cooperative heterogenous multi‐agent nonlinear systems is accomplished for the first time in the literature. Simulation results corresponding to a team of six AUVs are provided to demonstrate and illustrate the advantages and superiority of our proposed cooperative control strategies as compared to the methods that are available in the literature. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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