MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408790720 · doi:10.3390/drones9040233

Real-Time Optimal Control Design for Quad-Tilt-Wing Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

2025· article· en· W4408790720 on OpenAlex
Zahra Samadikhoshkho, Michael Lipsett

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDrones · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdaptive Control of Nonlinear Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWingTilt (camera)DroneComputer scienceFixed wingAeronauticsAerospace engineeringEngineeringStructural engineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quad-tilt-wing (QTW) Unpiloted Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) combine the vertical takeoff and landing capabilities of rotary-wing designs with the high-speed, long-range performance of fixed-wing aircraft, offering significant advantages in both civil and military applications. The unique configuration of QTW UAVs presents complex control challenges due to nonlinear dynamics, strong coupling between translational and rotational motions, and significant variations in aerodynamic characteristics during transitions between flight modes. To address these challenges, this study develops an optimal control framework tailored for real-time operations. A State-Dependent Riccati Equation (SDRE) approach is employed for attitude control, addressing nonlinearities, while a Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR) is used for position and velocity control to achieve robustness and optimal performance. By integrating these strategies and utilizing the inverse dynamics approach, the proposed control system ensures stable and efficient operation. This work provides a solution to the optimal control complexities of QTW UAVs, advancing their applicability in demanding and dynamic operational environments.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score0.905

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.226 · 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