MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014604693 · doi:10.1109/tim.2020.2985553

Guidance Mechanism for Flexible-Wing Aircraft Using Measurement-Interfaced Machine-Learning Platform

2020· article· en· W3014604693 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammed Abouheaf, Nathaniel Mailhot, Wail Gueaieb, Davide Spinello

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicModel Reduction and Neural Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstrumentation (computer programming)Process (computing)Control engineeringInterface (matter)Stability (learning theory)AerodynamicsArtificial neural networkEngineeringArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceWingMechanism (biology)Control systemSimulationAerospace engineeringMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The autonomous operation of flexible-wing aircraft poses theoretical and technical challenges not yet addressed in the literature. The lack of an exact modeling framework is due to the complex nonlinear aerodynamics driven by the deformations of the flexible-wings, which in turn complicates the controls and instrumentation setup of the navigation system. This urges for innovative approaches to interface affordable instrumentation platforms to autonomously control this type of aircraft. This article leverages the ideas from instrumentation and measurements, machine learning, and optimization fields in order to develop an autonomous navigation system for a flexible-wing aircraft. A novel machine-learning process based on a guiding search mechanism is developed to interface real-time measurements of wing-orientation dynamics into control decisions. This process is realized using an online value iteration algorithm based on two improved and interacting model-free control strategies in real time. The first strategy is concerned with achieving the tracking objectives, whereas the second supports the stability of the system. A neural network platform that employs adaptive critics is utilized to approximate the control strategies while approximating the assessments of their values. An experimental actuation system is utilized to test the validity of the proposed platform. The experimental results are shown to be aligned with the stability features of the proposed model-free adaptive learning approach.

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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.170 · 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

Citations17
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and MeasurementSame topicModel Reduction and Neural NetworksFrench-language works237,207