Dynamics of Laser-Charged UAVs: A Battery Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, we aim to sustain unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)-based missions for longer periods of times through different techniques. First, we consider on-the-mission UAV recharging by a low-power laser source (below 1 kW). In order to achieve the maximal energy gain from the low-power laser source, we propose an operational compromise, which consists of the UAV resting over buildings with cleared line of sight to the laser source. Second, to provide a precise energy consumption/harvesting estimation at the UAV, we investigate the latter's dynamics in a mission environment. Indeed, we study the UAV's battery dynamics by leveraging the electrical models for motors and battery. Subsequently, using these models, the path planning problem in a particular Internet-of-Things-based usecase is revisited from the battery perspective. The objective is to extend the UAV's operation time using both laser-charging and accurate battery level estimation. Through a graph theory approach, the problem is solved optimally, and compared to benchmark trajectory approaches. Numerical results demonstrate the efficiency of this novel battery perspective for all path planning approaches. In contrast, we found that the energy perspective is very conservative and does not exploit optimally the available energy resources. Nevertheless, we propose a simple adjustment method to correct the energy perspective, by carefully evaluating the energy as a function of the UAV motion regimes. Finally, the impact of several parameters, such as turbulence and distance to charging source, is studied.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".