MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3122155305 · doi:10.2316/j.2021.206-0610

OBSTACLE AVOIDANCE FOR MULTI-UAV SYSTEM WITH OPTIMIZED ARTIFICIAL POTENTIAL FIELD ALGORITHM

2021· article· en· W3122155305 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Yuehao Yan, Zhiying Lv, Jinbiao Yuan, Shufeng Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Robotics and Automation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerospace Engineering and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsObstacle avoidanceComputer sciencePotential fieldObstacleField (mathematics)AlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMathematicsMobile robotPhysicsRobot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have incomparable advantages and gradually form multi-UAV systems, in which many UAVs work together to accomplish tasks through cooperation.In the case of flying in an unknown environment and the very close distance between them, it is essential to have a useful collision avoidance system to avoid the collision between obstacles and UAVs and between inter-UAVs.In this paper, a comprehensive optimal obstacle avoidant mechanism of UAV path planning is constructed.The flight environment of UAVs is described, and the warning ranges and danger ranges of UAV and obstacles are given fully considering the execution time and flight platform of UAV.Then, a reliable artificial potential field (APF) model for path planning of multi-UAV systems in a complex environment is presented, in which a method to save UAV's energy and the solution for UAV Local minimization problem are proposed.Finally, the applicability of the improved algorithm is verified by simulation 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 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.211 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Robotics and AutomationSame topicAerospace Engineering and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207