MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307436827 · doi:10.3390/drones6110323

Adaptive Nonlinear Model Predictive Horizon Using Deep Reinforcement Learning for Optimal Trajectory Planning

2022· article· en· W4307436827 on OpenAlexaff
Younes Al Younes, Martin Barczyk

Bibliographic record

VenueDrones · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforcement learningTrajectoryFidelityComputer scienceNonlinear systemControl theory (sociology)Adaptation (eye)Trajectory optimizationHorizonTime horizonArtificial intelligenceStability (learning theory)Scheme (mathematics)High fidelityMathematical optimizationOptimal controlMachine learningEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an adaptive trajectory planning approach for nonlinear dynamical systems based on deep reinforcement learning (DRL). This methodology is applied to the authors’ recently published optimization-based trajectory planning approach named nonlinear model predictive horizon (NMPH). The resulting design, which we call ‘adaptive NMPH’, generates optimal trajectories for an autonomous vehicle based on the system’s states and its environment. This is done by tuning the NMPH’s parameters online using two different actor-critic DRL-based algorithms, deep deterministic policy gradient (DDPG) and soft actor-critic (SAC). Both adaptive NMPH variants are trained and evaluated on an aerial drone inside a high-fidelity simulation environment. The results demonstrate the learning curves, sample complexity, and stability of the DRL-based adaptation scheme and show the superior performance of adaptive NMPH relative to our earlier designs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDronesSame topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207