MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Visual Heading Estimation for UAVs in Indoor Environments

2021· article· en· W3141185698 on OpenAlexaff
A. Salib, A. Moussa, M. Moussa, Naser El‐Sheimy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDroneComputer scienceHeading (navigation)Artificial intelligenceReal-time computingComputer visionLidarGNSS applicationsGlobal Positioning SystemRemote sensingEngineeringAerospace engineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, The UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) industry is getting a lot of attention, especially for very small drones that could fly indoors. Such a small drone can help perform rescue tasks such as investigating gas leaks or emergency situation that imposes risk on human intervention. Additionally, the UAVs can be utilized for indoor inspection and 3D mapping. The indoor environment is very challenging for the UAVs since the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) cannot be reliably accessed to help UAV to locate itself. Various sensors could be mounted on UAVs to help the surveillance and navigation aspects of the operation. Range sensors such as 2D Lasers and LIDAR are very useful for providing valuable measurements towards reliable localization algorithms. Including such sensors will typically raise the system cost and limit the flight time due to increased power consumption. This research aims to assess the potential of using the typically installed UAV main camera to help estimate the UAV heading. The typical indoor environment includes many challenging situations such as monochrome surfaces and identical repeated patterns, especially in the ground surface. The research investigates the performance of different heading estimation approaches using a minimum cost configuration (without laser scanners). The proposed integration between the drone forward camera and the downward camera enhanced the navigation result compared to the other individual solutions using the downward camera only, forward camera only, or magnetometer. The performance of the investigated approaches in a real indoor flight is presented and discussed.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.232
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationFrench-language works237,207