Modeling and prediction of powered parafoil unmanned aerial vehicle throttle and servo controls through artificial neural networks
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study proposes a framework for developing a realistic model for throttle and servo control algorithms for a powered parafoil unmanned aerial vehicle (PPUAV) using artificial neural networks (ANNs). Two servo motors on an L-shaped platform, control and steer the PPUAV. Six degrees of freedom mathematical model of a dynamic parafoil system is built to test the technique's efficacy using a simulation in which disturbances mimic actual flights. A guiding law is then established, including the cross-track error and the line-of-sight approach. Furthermore, a path-following controller is constructed using the proportional-integral derivative, and a simulation platform was created to evaluate numerical data illustrating the route's validity following the technique. PPUAV was developed, built, and instrumented to collect real-time flight data to test the controller. These dynamic characteristics were sent into the ANN for training. A diverging-converging design was identified to obtain the best consistency between predicted and observed throttle and servo control values. For a comparable flight route, the control signal of the simulated model is compared with those of the actual and ANN-predicted models. The comparative findings show that the ANN-predicted and actual control inputs were almost identical, with an 80%–99% match. However, the simulated response showed deviation from the actual control input, with an accuracy of 50%–80%.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it