MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387757734 · doi:10.1109/lra.2023.3325776

CoNi-MPC: Cooperative Non-inertial Frame Based Model Predictive Control

2023· article· en· W4387757734 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Robotics and Automation Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceInertial measurement unitInertial frame of referenceFrame (networking)TrajectoryControl theory (sociology)Model predictive controlReference frameMotion (physics)Controller (irrigation)Artificial intelligenceRobotComputer visionSimulationControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This letter presents a novel solution for UAV control in cooperative multi-robot systems, which can be used in various scenarios such as leader-following, landing on a moving base, or specific relative motion with a target. Unlike classical methods that tackle UAV control in the world frame, we directly control the UAV in the target coordinate frame, without making motion assumptions about the target. In detail, we formulate a non-linear model predictive controller of a UAV, referred to as the agent, within a non-inertial frame (i.e., the target frame). The system requires the relative states (pose and velocity), the angular velocity and the accelerations of the target, which can be obtained by relative localization methods and ubiquitous MEMS IMU sensors, respectively. This framework eliminates dependencies that are vital in classical solutions, such as accurate state estimation for both the agent and target, prior knowledge of the target motion model, and continuous trajectory re-planning for some complex tasks. We have performed extensive simulations to investigate the control performance with varying motion characteristics of the target. Furthermore, we conducted real robot experiments, employing either simulated relative pose estimation from motion capture systems indoors or directly from our previous relative pose estimation devices outdoors, to validate the applicability and feasibility of the proposed approach.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score0.829

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.219 · 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