A systematic review on metaheuristic approaches for autonomous path planning of unmanned aerial vehicles
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the path planning of UAVs, autonomous decision-making and control are challenging tasks in the uncertain 3D environment consisting of static and dynamic obstacles. Hence, the selection of appropriate path-planning approaches is essential. In the proposed work, we have considered the meta-heuristic approaches only for an in-depth review. Metaheuristic approaches have been remarkably known for solving complex problems, optimal solutions, and lesser computational complexity compared to deterministic approaches that produce an inefficient solution. An in-depth review has been made by considering the approaches used for path planning, their advantages, disadvantages, applications, the type of time domain (offline or online), type of environment (simulation or real time), hybridization with other approaches, single or multiple UAV system, and obstacle handled (static or dynamic). It is observed that current meta-heuristic methods face constraints like inadequate convergence rates, entrapment in local optima, and complex operations, necessitating continuous development of novel approaches. Implementation of path-planning approaches are very much limited to simulation study over experimental analysis. Hybrid algorithms emerge as a potential solution for tackling these hurdles and optimizing UAV navigation, particularly in dynamic environments involving multiple UAVs. The paper highlights key research gaps, trends, along with prospects in the field of research.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it