MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

CPP-OTPO: A Cognitive Multi-UAV System for Adaptive Path and Trajectory Optimization

2024· article· en· W4401540744 on OpenAlexaff
Gunasekaran Raja, Selvam Essaky, Surya Raj M, Jawaharlal Nehru N, Christ Joe, Kapal Dev, Waleed Ejaz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrajectoryComputer sciencePath (computing)Trajectory optimizationCognitive systemsCognitionComputer networkPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) have significantly transformed various Search and Rescue (SAR) operations. Effective resource deployment is still difficult in modern SAR missions, especially in complex and unexpected circumstances. Conventional techniques for multi-UAV systems for SAR operations frequently have difficulties responding to changing conditions. This research proposes a unique method of combining 6G communication technology and Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) to improve the cognitive capacities of multi-UAV systems for cooperative coverage to enhance autonomous decision-making in challenging environments. The proposed Coverage Path Planning-Online Time-based Policy Optimization (CPP-OTPO) system utilizes DRL to imbue a multi-UAV framework capable of enabling adaptive decision-making based on realtime observations. The integration of 6G communication further enhances connectivity among multi-UAV systems. The system incorporates boundary search techniques in UAV path planning to achieve optimized CPP, emphasizing resilience against navigational uncertainties. Additionally, the proposed OTPO improves the effectiveness of the target search and increases the possibility of detecting targets by guiding UAVs to change their search policies from exploiting to exploring when required. Empirical evaluations demonstrate a remarkable 92.2% operational time efficiency compared to traditional algorithms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.417
Threshold uncertainty score0.491

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207