CoNi-MPC: Cooperative Non-inertial Frame Based Model Predictive Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".