MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400521595 · doi:10.1139/dsa-2024-0007

U-SMART: unified swarm management and resource tracking framework for unoccupied aerial vehicles

2024· article· en· W4400521595 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abhishek Phadke, F. Antonio Medrano, Michael J. Starek

Bibliographic record

VenueDrone Systems and Applications · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSwarm behaviourComputer scienceModular designRobustness (evolution)Situation awarenessDistributed computingSwarm intelligenceCollision avoidanceReal-time computingParticle swarm optimizationEngineeringArtificial intelligenceCollisionComputer securityMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unoccupied aerial vehicle (UAV) swarms have the ability to exhibit improved capabilities and performance when compared to individual UAVs. However, their target operation environment is fraught with disruptions, including communication limitations, sensor failures, and dynamic environmental conditions, which can significantly impact swarm performance and robustness. To address these challenges, the proposed unified swarm management and resource tracking (U-SMART) framework focuses on enabling resiliency within UAV swarms. Resiliency refers to the swarm's ability to adapt, recover, and maintain functionality in the face of disruptions. The framework integrates features such as agent well-being tracking, collision and obstacle avoidance, energy management, and task control to enhance the swarm's ability to withstand disruptions and continue operating effectively to provide a comprehensive solution for unified swarm management. The modular design allows flexible configuration, upgrades, and the addition of new components. This facilitates easy adaptation to specific swarm requirements and evolving operational needs. Using frameworks like U-SMART, swarm operators can efficiently manage and control UAV swarms, mitigate disruptions, and maintain high situational awareness in challenging environments. Performance is validated for the integrated modules to test feasibility for different experiment scenarios. For each module and feasibility test, thresholds were set to indicate acceptable performance in the presence of disruptions, and results for the swarm running on the proposed framework showed the acceptable performance of agents validated using explicitly designed metrics.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.246 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDrone Systems and ApplicationsSame topicDistributed Control Multi-Agent SystemsFrench-language works237,207