MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414480441 · doi:10.1016/j.ast.2025.110964

Neural Networks for high accuracy short term ship motion predictions with applications to autonomous UAVs

2025· article· en· W4414480441 on OpenAlex
Rishad A. Irani

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAerospace Science and Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMaritime Navigation and Safety
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsArtificial neural networkAutoencoderComputationNoise (video)Term (time)Nonlinear systemMotion (physics)Data modeling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Computationally efficient models which can be used by UAV mounted computers • Comparison of common Neural Network model and new model • Robust Neural Network models that can now be used without noise filtering • Large augmented dataset to reflect real data measured from UAV An Autonomous Uncrewed Aerial Vehicle (UAV) attempting to perform a vertical landing on a moving ship’s deck must be capable of predicting the ship’s motion in order determine the most opportune landing time. If the UAV is acting independent of the ship additional constraints are introduced; computation resources are limited to what can be mounted on the drone and the UAV must predict motion from noisy UAV-mounted sensors. The work presented proposes a Gated Recurrent Unit based Autoencoder (GRU-A) Neural Network (NN) model for predicting future ship motion with the aforementioned constraints. The GRU-A model is compared to a more typical Multi-Layered Perceptron, Nonlinear Auto-Regressive (MLP-NAR) NN model. Both NN models are tested for their ability to minimize error over a 5 s prediction horizon composed of 50 separate time-steps, their ability to predict through noisy inputs and mitigate the introduced error, and their computation costs. Furthermore, a large dataset made from a high fidelity simulation is transformed to reflect data that would be encountered in-situ, improving the applicability of the work. It was found that the proposed GRU-A model has superior signal prediction capabilities, achieving approximately 30 times lower error than the MLP-NAR model when predicting over a 5 s period, suitable of a vertical landing time horizon. In addition, the proposed GRU-A model was more resilient to input noise and, when trained with noise it outperformed the MLP-NAR. It was also found that the memory required to compute predictions with both models is approximately equal and that the computation time of the GRU-A model is similar to the MLP-NAR model with both models being capable of making predictions within 100 ms so long as they are not chosen to be too large. Overall, the proposed GRU-A model is demonstrated as a superior alternative to the more typical MLP-NAR model when predicting full signals in all cases for use with a small UAV.

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 score0.882
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.239 · 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