Disturbance rejection control of the agricultural quadrotor based on adaptive neural network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to solve the problem of stability of agricultural quadrotor working, its controller designing is the first priority. Therefore, this paper makes an attempt to use the Radial Basis Function (RBF) neural network adaptive method combined with sliding mode control to control its height channel. Validation of the efficacy of the RBF neural network in control is conducted through simulation experiments utilizing quadrotor parameters. The application of the method to the control of agricultural quadrotor has laid a theoretical foundation. At the same time, through simulation experiments, it is concluded in theory that the RBF neural network can have a good prediction and elimination effect on the interference during the flight, and the change of the time constant will not affect the control effect of the aircraft. Notably, abrupt changes in time constant indicate UAV motor malfunction. Simulation results affirm the efficacy of the proposed control method in regulating UAV altitude and addressing sudden faults. Real-world experimentation reveals that even when UAV propellers sustain damage to a certain extent, altitude control and hover capabilities remain intact. These findings provide a solid groundwork for subsequent altitude control endeavors in agricultural quadrotor operations, while also offering innovative avenues for advancing the field.
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".