MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391843196 · doi:10.3390/aerospace11020157

Online Deterministic 3D Trajectory Generation for Electric Vertical Take-Off and Landing Aircraft

2024· article· en· W4391843196 on OpenAlexaff
Zoe Mbikayi, Agnes Steinert, Dominik Heimsch, Moritz Speckmaier, Philippe Rudolph, Hugh H. T. Liu, Florian Holzapfel

Bibliographic record

VenueAerospace · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrajectoryAeronauticsAerospace engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringPhysicsAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of non-piloted eVTOL aircraft in non-segregated airspace requires reliable and deterministic automatic flight guidance systems for the aircraft to remain predictable to all the users of the airspace and maintain a high level of safety. In this paper we present a 3D trajectory generation module based on clothoid transition segments in the horizontal plane and high order polynomial transition segments in the vertical plane. The expressions of the coefficients of the polynomial are derived offline are used to generate the trajectory online, making the system capable of running in real time without requiring enormous computational power. For the horizontal plane, we focus on the flyby transition, and therefore present a thorough analysis of the flyby geometry and the limitations linked to this geometry and the construct of three-segment trajectory generation around a fixed turn rate. We present feasible solutions for these limitations, and show simulation results for the combined horizontal and vertical plane concepts, allowing the system to generate complex 3D trajectories.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.253 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAerospaceSame topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207