MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285069906 · doi:10.20517/ir.2022.13

Motion planning and tracking control of unmanned underwater vehicles: technologies, challenges and prospects

2022· article· en· W4285069906 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIntelligence & Robotics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUnderwater Vehicles and Communication Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsUnmanned underwater vehicleMotion planningUnderwaterRemotely operated underwater vehicleTracking (education)TrajectoryMotion controlTracking systemComputer scienceEngineeringSystems engineeringRobotMobile robotArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The motion planning and tracking control techniques of unmanned underwater vehicles (UUV) are fundamentally significant for efficient and robust UUV navigation, which is crucial for underwater rescue, facility maintenance, marine resource exploration, aquatic recreation, etc. Studies on UUV motion planning and tracking control have been growing rapidly worldwide, which are usually sorted into the following topics: task assignment of the multi-UUV system, UUV path planning, and UUV trajectory tracking. This paper provides a comprehensive review of conventional and intelligent technologies for motion planning and tracking control of UUVs. Analysis of the benefits and drawbacks of these various methodologies in literature is presented. In addition, the challenges and prospects of UUV motion planning and tracking control are provided as possible developments for future research.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.827
Threshold uncertainty score0.456

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.200 · 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