Multiple UAVs in forest fire fighting mission using particle swarm optimization
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
This paper investigates forest fires fighting application using team(s) of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), in view of UAVs having great advantages in performing such tasks. However, important challenges in fire fighting missions in general are to perform the task with high performance in minimum time. In this paper, it is assumed that the fire spots are already detected and their coordinates will be sent to the fire fighting UAVs teams. Once the fire fighting team(s) receive relevant information, the team begins to solve the task assignment problem using the auction-based algorithm. The objective of the algorithm is to assign each UAV to each fire spot according to their relative distances, to minimize the distance traveled between each UAV's initial position and its assigned fire spot. Then, each UAV will optimally plan its path to its assigned fire spot by using particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm. The proposed algorithm calculates the optimal control inputs while taking into consideration the control inputs constraints while avoiding potential UAVs collisions during motion.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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