MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964050632 · doi:10.1109/icra.2017.7989607

Deep neural networks for improved, impromptu trajectory tracking of quadrotors

2017· article· en· W2964050632 on OpenAlexaff
Qiyang Li, Jingxing Qian, Zining Zhu, Xuchan Bao, Mohamed K. Helwa, Angela P. Schoellig

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsDynamic Systems Analysis (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrajectoryComputer scienceController (irrigation)Tracking (education)Control theory (sociology)Artificial neural networkPID controllerNonlinear systemArtificial intelligenceControl engineeringControl (management)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trajectory tracking control for quadrotors is important for applications ranging from surveying and inspection, to film making. However, designing and tuning classical controllers, such as proportional-integral-derivative (PID) controllers, to achieve high tracking precision can be time-consuming and difficult, due to hidden dynamics and other non-idealities. The Deep Neural Network (DNN), with its superior capability of approximating abstract, nonlinear functions, proposes a novel approach for enhancing trajectory tracking control. This paper presents a DNN-based algorithm as an add-on module that improves the tracking performance of a classical feedback controller. Given a desired trajectory, the DNNs provide a tailored reference input to the controller based on their gained experience. The input aims to achieve a unity map between the desired and the output trajectory. The motivation for this work is an interactive “fly-as-you-draw” application, in which a user draws a trajectory on a mobile device, and a quadrotor instantly flies that trajectory with the DNN-enhanced control system. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed approach improves the tracking precision for user-drawn trajectories after the DNNs are trained on selected periodic trajectories, suggesting the method's potential in real-world applications. Tracking errors are reduced by around 40-50% for both training and testing trajectories from users, highlighting the DNNs' capability of generalizing knowledge.

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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations91
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207