Improving the Region of Attraction of a Multi-Rotor UAV by Estimating Unknown Disturbances
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study presents a machine learning-aided approach to accurately estimate the region of attraction (ROA) of a multi-rotor unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) controlled using a linear quadratic regulator (LQR) controller. Conventional ROA estimation approaches rely on a nominal dynamic model for ROA calculation, leading to inaccurate estimation due to unknown dynamics and disturbances associated with the physical system. To address this issue, our study utilizes a neural network to predict these unknown disturbances of a planar quadrotor. The nominal model integrated with the learned disturbances is then employed to calculate the ROA of the planer quadrotor using a graphical technique. The estimated ROA is then compared with the ROA calculated using Lyapunov analysis and the graphical approach without incorporating the learned disturbances. The results illustrated that the proposed method provides a more accurate estimation of the ROA, while the conventional Lyapunov-based estimation tends to be more conservative.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".