Stabilized Robust Control for Lightweight Autonomous Aircraft Mobility: A Quantum Reinforcement Learning Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The stability of aircraft remains vulnerable to sudden external disturbances and unpredictable vortices. The aircraft's attitude angles undergo rapid changes due to random turbulence. Consequently, to ensure safety, it is essential to control the aircraft's control surfaces, i.e., ailerons, elevators, and rudder angles, to maintain its static stability. Although classical closed-loop control methods have been widely adopted, their limited adaptability to changing dynamics calls for more robust solutions. Reinforcement learning (RL) offers adaptive capabilities but often demands a large number of training parameters and substantial computational resources, which may be impractical for real-time lightweight aircraft applications. To overcome these limitations, this paper introduces a quantum aircraft with the quantum actorcritic networks-based aircraft control (QACN-AC) algorithm. By utilizing quantum neural networks (QNN), QACN-AC significantly reduces the number of parameters required for training, thus mitigating computational overhead while preserving robust control performance. The QACN-AC's effectiveness is validated through realistic simulations leveraging Boeing's B777 specifications. The results highlight QACN-AC's superiority over conventional RL, evidenced by a$1.25 \times$higher control performance and a$760 \times$reduction in the number of required parameters.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".