MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047145337 · doi:10.1139/juvs-2020-0016

Linear model predictive control for vision-based UAV pursuit

2020· article· en· W3047145337 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Christopher Surma, Martin Barczyk

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Unmanned Vehicle Systems · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDroneComputer scienceModel predictive controlVideographyArtificial intelligenceRangingComputer visionSimulationReal-time computingControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article develops and implements a vision-based unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)-to-UAV pursuit system using a commercial off-the-shelf Parrot AR.Drone 2.0 quadrotor. This technology is intended as a countermeasure to rogue drones carrying out activities such as flying in restricted airspace, performing unauthorized aerial videography, transporting contraband and other criminal activities, or being used as improvised weapons. The proposed approach offers benefits over other current solutions, such as wide-area radio-frequency jamming that interferes with regular communication devices or high-energy military laser systems that are expensive and time consuming to set up. A linear dynamics model of the AR.Drone 2.0 vehicle stabilized by its onboard feedback control system is derived, and its parameters are experimentally identified. A linear model predictive control is developed to track specified flight trajectories, then implemented and validated in hardware flight tests. Detection and ranging of the target UAV from the pursuer UAV’s onboard monocular camera are performed using the YOLO v2 convolutional neural network algorithm. The combined control and vision design is implemented in hardware and tested quantitatively in flight experiments.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.395

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Unmanned Vehicle SystemsSame topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207