A Vision-Based Autonomous Landing Guidance Strategy for a Micro-UAV by the Modified Camera View
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Autonomous landing is one of the key technologies for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) which can improve task flexibility in various fields. In this paper, a vision-based autonomous landing strategy is proposed for a quadrotor micro-UAV based on a novel camera view angle conversion method, fast landing marker detection, and an autonomous guidance approach. The front-view camera of the micro-UAV video is first modified by a new strategy to obtain a top-down view. By this means, the landing marker can be captured by the onboard camera of the micro-UAV and is then detected by the YOLOv5 algorithm in real time. The central coordinate of the landing marker is estimated and used to generate the guidance commands for the flight controller. After that, the guidance commands are sent by the ground station to perform the landing task of the UAV. Finally, the flight experiments using DJI Tello UAV are conducted outdoors and indoors, respectively. The original UAV platform is modified using the proposed camera view angle-changing strategy so that the top-down view can be achieved for performing the landing mission. The experimental results show that the proposed landing marker detection algorithm and landing guidance strategy can complete the autonomous landing task of the micro-UAV efficiently.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".