MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205966649 · doi:10.2514/6.2022-0757

Model of UAV and Downwash for Multi-UAV Path Planning

2022· article· en· W4205966649 on OpenAlexaff
Chih‐Chun Chen, Hugh H. Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueAIAA SCITECH 2022 Forum · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDownwashMotion planningComputer sciencePath (computing)Aerospace engineeringArtificial intelligenceComputer networkEngineeringRobot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

View Video Presentation: https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2022-0757.vid This paper develops a method to model the air flow downwash effect generated by the quadrotor unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) and its effect on the neighboring UAVs. The downwash model derives the resultant downwash force and torque and takes the UAV attitude into the account. Each UAV is shaped by a virtual structure for collision-free path planning. The shape is modified from a standard spherical body to a proposed cylinder to better minimize downwash impact. A flock-based path planning algorithm and an optimal reciprocal collision avoidance (ORCA) algorithm are implemented and investigated in this study to analyze the downwash effect and the performance of the proposed cylindrical shape UAV model. The downwash model simulation shows how the UAV can be affected when it counters the downwash air flow. A flock-based algorithm and an ORCA algorithm along with the spherical and cylindrical shape UAV models are simulated to demonstrate the cylindrical model can improve path planning performance.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0040.001

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIAA SCITECH 2022 ForumSame topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207