MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768478721 · doi:10.1109/taes.2017.2773262

A Thrust Model Aided Fault Diagnosis Method for the Altitude Estimation of a Quadrotor

2017· article· en· W2768478721 on OpenAlexaff
Pin Lyu, Jizhou Lai, Jianye Liu, Hugh H. T. Liu, Qingrui Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInertial Sensor and Navigation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAccelerometerFault detection and isolationRedundancy (engineering)BarometerThrustFault (geology)Control theory (sociology)Inertial measurement unitInertial navigation systemComputer scienceEngineeringInertial frame of referenceArtificial intelligenceGeologyAerospace engineeringActuator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a new fault diagnosis method is presented for the sensors in the vertical direction of a quadrotor. Different from the existing methods that treat the inertial sensors and the measurement sensors separately, the presented method is capable of dealing with both the z-axis accelerometer and the barometer. The knowledge of the thrust model is used to generate an analytical redundancy based fault diagnosis approach for altitude estimation. The filter design, fault detection, isolation, and recovery problems are addressed. An improved chi-test method is used for fault detection. Real-flight data is used to validate the proposed approaches, showing that the faults of the z-axis accelerometer and the barometer can both be detected and the thrust model of a quadrotor can be used to replace the faulty z-axis accelerometer.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.267 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations36
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic SystemsSame topicInertial Sensor and NavigationFrench-language works237,207