MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3142824457 · doi:10.1142/s2737480721500059

Path Following Control for UAV Using Deep Reinforcement Learning Approach

2021· article· en· W3142824457 on OpenAlexaff
Yintao Zhang, Youmin Zhang, Ziquan Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueGuidance Navigation and Control · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforcement learningComputer sciencePath (computing)Convergence (economics)Motion planningFunction (biology)Artificial intelligenceControl (management)TrajectoryQ-learningAction (physics)Domain (mathematical analysis)Mathematical optimizationAlgorithmControl theory (sociology)MathematicsRobot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have been extensively used in civil and industrial applications due to the rapid development of the guidance, navigation and control (GNC) technologies. Especially, using deep reinforcement learning methods for motion control acquires a major progress recently, since deep [Formula: see text]-learning algorithm has been successfully applied to the continuous action domain problem. This paper proposes an improved deep deterministic policy gradient (DDPG) algorithm for path following control problem of UAV. A specific reward function is designed for minimizing the cross-track error of the path following problem. In the training phase, a double experience replay buffer (DERB) is used to increase the learning efficiency and accelerate the convergence speed. First, the model of UAV path following problem has been established. After that, the framework of DDPG algorithm is constructed. Then the state space, action space and reward function of the UAV path following algorithm are designed. DERB is proposed to accelerate the training phase. Finally, simulation results are carried out to show the effectiveness of the proposed DERB–DDPG method.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations51
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGuidance Navigation and ControlSame topicReinforcement Learning in RoboticsFrench-language works237,207