MOAR Planner: Multi-Objective and Adaptive Risk-Aware Path Planning for Infrastructure Inspection with a UAV
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The problem of autonomous navigation for UAV inspection remains challenging as it requires effectively navigating in close proximity to obstacles, while accounting for dynamic risk factors such as weather conditions, communication reliability, and battery autonomy. This paper introduces the MOAR path planner which addresses the complexities of evolving risks during missions. It offers real-time trajectory adaptation while concurrently optimizing safety, time, and energy. The planner employs a risk-aware cost function that integrates pre-computed cost maps, the new concepts of damage and insertion costs, and an adaptive speed planning framework. With that, the optimal path is searched in a graph using a discrete representation of the state and action spaces. The method is evaluated through simulations and real-world flight tests. The results show the capability to generate real-time trajectories spanning a broad range of evaluation metrics—around 90% of the range occupied by popular algorithms. The proposed framework contributes by enabling UAVs to navigate more autonomously and reliably in critical missions.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".