MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Intelligent Path Planning and Following for UAVs in Forest Surveillance and Fire Fighting Missions

2018· article· en· W3009043760 on OpenAlexaff
Lidong Zhang, Zhixiang Liu, Youmin Zhang, Jianliang Ai

Bibliographic record

Venue2018 IEEE CSAA Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference (CGNCC) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMotion planningTerrainComputer sciencePath (computing)Task (project management)Field (mathematics)FirefightingReal-time computingPlan (archaeology)Curse of dimensionalitySimulationArtificial intelligenceRobotEngineeringSystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a flexible, efficient, and powerful platform for a variety of practical applications, the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) has attracted increasing attention in the field of forest fire monitoring, detection, and tracking in recent years. In forest surveillance and fire fighting missions, threats may occur when a UAV is assigned to fly over a forest area, as statical obstacles like hills may stand between the base and the fire spot, and dynamic obstacles like birds may appear during the flight. To deal with these challenges, a path planning algorithm that can learn the terrain environment and generate the motion policy to plan an optimal path is developed. A hierarchical structure is adopted for path planning to achieve the optimal result in a global manner, as well as avoid the curse of dimensionality. Moreover, an intelligent path following algorithm that can perceive and avoid dynamic obstacles is also developed for the UAV to accomplish the task safely. Numerical simulations are conducted to validate the proposed algorithms.

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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2018 IEEE CSAA Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference (CGNCC)Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207