Multi-sensor data fusion for autonomous flight of unmanned aerial vehicles in complex flight environments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The flight environment of unmanned aerial vehicles faces various challenges. To effectively navigate and perform tasks, they need to effectively integrate multiple sensors. This study applies the adaptive weighted average method, combined with data from global positioning system, inertial measurement unit, three-dimensional optical detection and ranging, and uses linear Kalman filtering to smooth the merged velocity data. High-order B-spline curves for route planning and applying flight constraint formulas to better adapt are used to the dynamics of unmanned aerial vehicles. The research results indicated that the improved adaptive weighting algorithm had high comprehensive performance for multi-sensor data fusion, with the highest accuracy, robustness, real-time performance, and consistency of 94.2%, 93.7%, 100%, and 95.6%, respectively. The flight path lengths planned by the A* algorithm and higher-order B-spline curve were 15.7 and 16.3 m, respectively, and the flight time was 8.2 and 7.1 s, respectively. The flight path planned by higher-order B-spline curve was further away from obstacles. The use of adaptive weighted fusion and linear Kalman filtering facilitates the fusion of multi-sensor data, and autonomous flight routes planned using high-order B-spline curves can also meet the needs of unmanned aerial vehicle flight in complex flight environments.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".