MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385733470 · doi:10.1504/ijbic.2023.132789

UAV path planning in presence of occlusions as noisy combinatorial multi-objective optimisation

2023· article· en· W4385733470 on OpenAlexaff
N.A. Aishwaryaprajna, T. Kirubarajan, Ratnasingham Tharmarasa, Jonathan E. Rowe

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Bio-Inspired Computation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMotion planningPath (computing)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionMathematical optimizationMathematicsComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A realistic noisy combinatorial problem on surveillance by unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) in presence of weather factors is defined. The presence of cloud coverage is considered as a posterior Gaussian noise in the visibility region of the UAV. Recent studies indicate that recombination-based search mechanisms are helpful in solving noisy combinatorial problems. The search strategy of univariate marginal distribution algorithm that includes only selection and recombination, which has a close association with genepool crossover, proves to be beneficial in solving constrained and multi-objective combinatorial problems in presence of noise. This paper proposes a solution methodology based on multi-objective UMDA (moUMDA) with diversification mechanisms for the multi-objective problem of UAV surveillance. To obtain a well-spread set of Pareto optimal solutions, relevant diversification mechanisms are important. Numerical simulations show that moUMDA with and without K-means clustering provides better quality solutions and a more diverse Pareto optimal set than NSGA-II in solving this noisy problem.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Bio-Inspired ComputationSame topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207