Analysis of an Urban Air Taxi Inner Loop Controller with Noisy IMUs in an Urban Airflow Environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interest in operating commercial Urban Air Taxis (UAT) around the world has been growing rapidly over the last few years. One of the many challenges in designing aircraft suitable for operating in a turbulent urban airflow environment is to design a robust inner loop flight controller. This study investigates the effect of filtered Angular Random Walk (ARW) error found in Inertial Measurement Units (IMU) on the inner loop flight controller's ability to maintain stable, wings level, horizontal flight, while not causing noticeable discomfort to passengers and respecting the limits of authority of the aircraft's control surfaces in a representative urban airflow environment. The performance of two controller architectures were investigated: classical Proportional, Integral, Derivative (PID) control scheme as well as Linear Active Disturbance Rejection Control (LADRC) control scheme. The conclusion of this study provides recommendations on a minimum threshold of IMU sensor grades and general considersations that would be useful to the controller designer. The findings are demonstrated by observing the vertical acceleration, <tex>$n_{z}$</tex>, angular rate setpoint tracking performance, and control surface deflections.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".