PCVPC: Perception Constrained Visual Predictive Control For Agile Quadrotors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a perception constrained visual predictive control (PCVPC) algorithm for quadrotors to enable aggressive flights without using any position information. Our framework leverages nonlinear model predictive control (NMPC) to formulate a constrained image-based visual servoing (IBVS) problem. The quadrotor dynamics, image dynamics, actuation constraints, and visibility constraints are taken into account to handle quadrotor maneuvers with high agility. Two main challenges of applying IBVS to agile drones are considered: (i) high sensitivity of depths to intense orientation changes, and (ii) conflict between the visual servoing objective and action objective due to the underactuated nature. To deal with the first challenge, we parameterize a visual feature by a bearing vector and a distance, by which the depth will no longer be involved in the image dynamics. Meanwhile, we settle the conflict problem by compensating for the rotation in the future visual servoing cost using the predicted orientations of the quadrotor. Our approach in simulation shows that (i) it can work without any position information, (ii) it can achieve a maximum referebce speed of 9 m/s in trajectory tracking without losing the target, and (iii) it can reach a landmark, e.g., a gate in drone racing, from varied initial configurations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".