MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2735599454 · doi:10.23919/acc.2017.7963082

Formation control of high-altitude balloons experiencing real wind currents by discrete-time distributed extremum seeking control

2017· article· en· W2735599454 on OpenAlexaff
Isaac Vandermeulen, Martin Guay, P. James McLellan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExtremum Seeking Control Systems
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDelaunay triangulationVoronoi diagramController (irrigation)ComputationComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)Float (project management)Wind speedSimulationAerospace engineeringControl (management)MeteorologyEngineeringMarine engineeringAlgorithmMathematicsGeographyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a discrete-time method for the formation of high-altitude balloons is developed. The balloons float passively along the Earth's wind currents. For actuation, a balloon can change its altitude to enter a different wind current and move in a different direction. The control objective is to steer a fleet of balloons into a configuration where they are evenly distributed around the Earth. The control approach is a discrete-time distributed extremum-seeking controller. This controller works to minimize a measured cost function. It only requires a measurement of this cost function and does not require a model of the nonlinear time-varying wind currents. For the problem of balloon formation control, the cost function is based on a Voronoi partition resulting in an algorithm similar to Lloyd's algorithm. The control architecture is fully distributed. There is no central coordinator and each balloon receives all the information it needs by communicating to nearby balloons over a network whose structure is the Delaunay triangulation with the balloons as vertices. The resulting distributed control algorithm is computationally efficient as the burden of computation is shared between all of the balloons. Several simulations involving 1200 balloons are used to verify the effectiveness of this approach. The simulations use realistic nonlinear time-varying models which are obtained by interpolating gridded weather data obtained from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicExtremum Seeking Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207