Quadratic-Kalman-Filter-Based Sensor Fault Detection Approach for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sensors are crucial for the control of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). However, sensor faults will inevitably appear over time. Therefore, it is important to develop a sensor fault detection approach for the reliability of UAV. This article presents a novel model-based UAV fault detection approach based on quadratic Kalman filter (QKF). First, an accurate kinematic and dynamic model of UAVs is established, where the model is linearized and discretized for Kalman filter (KF). Second, the first KF is used for denoising, the secondKF is used to detrend, and residuals are calculated for detection. It is worth mentioning that the second KF is a modified Sage–Husa adaptive KF, which can automatically estimate the measurement noise variance. Compared with traditional approaches, this approach has the advantages of noise reduction, self-adaptation, divergence avoidance, and high detection rate. Simulation and experimental results show the effectiveness of the proposed approach, which can accurately detect the abrupt and incipient fault of an inertial measurement unit (IMU) sensor. At the same time, it can get the higher fault detection rates (FDRs) compared with conventional KF. Furthermore, this approach also provides the leading information and foundation for UAV fault-tolerant control.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".