Energy Optimal Control Allocation in a Redundantly Actuated Omnidirectional UAV
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a novel actuation model and control allocation strategy for a redundantly-actuated multirotor unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), referred to as the omnicopter. With an unconventional configuration, the omnicopter's eight propellers are able to produce all the six components of net force/torque, with two degrees of actuation redundancy. This enables the vehicle to execute motion trajectories unattainable with conventional underactuated multi-rotors. A new inverse actuator model is proposed that accounts for the significant interactions between propeller airflows by relating their output thrust forces to their input motor commands. Actuation redundancy is resolved by solving a convex constrained optimization problem. Its solution yields the most power efficient set of propellers thrusts that would produce a required net force/torque, while respecting the propeller thrust limits. When the required force/torque is infeasible due to the thrust limits, the solution would minimize the norm of the error between the desired and actual net force/torque vectors. Experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed model and control allocation strategy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".