MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206963569 · doi:10.1142/s2737480721400069

Fault-Tolerant Model Predictive Control of a Fixed-Wing UAV with Actuator Fault Estimation

2021· article· en· W4206963569 on OpenAlexaff
Vinayak Deshpande, Youmin Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueGuidance Navigation and Control · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl reconfigurationControl theory (sociology)Model predictive controlActuatorObserver (physics)Fault toleranceMIMOFault detection and isolationComputer scienceFault (geology)Control engineeringEngineeringControl (management)Distributed computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The vast majority of today’s engineering systems possess operational constraints and have multiple inputs and outputs. This classifies them as Multi-Input Multi-Output (MIMO) systems. This paper develops a novel observer-based fault diagnosis scheme with the capability of simultaneous state and actuator fault estimation for Linear Time-Invariant (LTI) MIMO systems, which is then integrated with Model Predictive Control (MPC) method for achieving fault-tolerant control. The application within this study is chosen to be the longitudinal flight control of a fixed-wing Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV). The observer-based method is combined with two MPC schemes to detect and compensate randomly occurring actuator faults in real time. The faults are modeled as a Loss Of Effectiveness (LOE). For the first (efficient) MPC method, a simple reconfiguration can be performed in the event of faults, as it is based on an absolute input formulation. However, as the second (integral-action) MPC is based on an incremental input formulation, reconfiguration is not required, since this algorithm has a degree of implicit fault tolerance. Numerical simulations demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach for both MPC schemes.

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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGuidance Navigation and ControlSame topicAdvanced Control Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207