Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 46 references

Acetrans: An Autonomous Corridor-Based and Efficient UAV Suspended Transport System

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A unified perception-planning-control stack makes cable-suspended drone transport autonomous, efficient, and safe around the clock, the paper claims.

desk verdict Genuinely useful full-stack suspended-load system, but the 'guarantee' holds only for the taut-cable planner; the bent-cable NMPC envelope is an unproven containment step. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.10349 v1 pith:L22HS6MK submitted 2025-09-12 cs.RO

Weiyan Lu , Huizhe Li , Yuhao Fang , Zhexuan Zhou , Junda Wu , Yude Li , Youmin Gong , Jie Mei This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.RO
keywords UAVsuspendedpayloadwhole-bodyperceptionsafeflightcorridortrajectoryoptimizationNMPCcablebendingLiDAR-IMUfusionaerialtransport
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper claims that Acetrans is the first fully autonomous suspended-load framework that unifies perception, planning, and control for UAVs hauling cable-slung payloads. It argues that a LiDAR-IMU module can estimate both payload pose and cable shape under taut and bent conditions, a new corridor-generation algorithm (MACIRI) makes whole-body planning one to three orders of magnitude faster than ESDF-based baselines, and an NMPC with trapezoidal cable-bending envelopes maintains safety even when the cable deforms. If correct, this would make round-the-clock autonomous aerial delivery practical in forests, urban canyons, and indoor spaces where manual slung-load flight is too risky.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the safe flight corridor produced by MACIRI, which accepts point, line, quadrilateral, or tetrahedral seeds and assigns each seed vertex its own obstacle-inflation radius. The convex-hull inclusion property—if all vertices satisfy the corridor's linear inequalities, every interior point does—allows the trajectory optimizer to guarantee whole-body safety while constraining only the quadrotor and payload, not the cable. At control time, a catenary-based estimator with a diffeomorphic reparameterization fits the bent cable in a plane, and the NMPC imposes constraints on just four trapezoid vertices that enclose the estimated cable, keeping the whole body inside the co

What would settle it

Run the system under a wind field strong enough to bend the cable out of the fitted catenary plane while a motion-capture system tracks the true cable shape; if the true cable exits the trapezoidal envelope used in the NMPC at any time, the claimed whole-body safety guarantee is violated.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Acetrans demonstrates that safe, efficient suspended-load transport can be achieved by jointly estimating cable and payload states with LiDAR and an end-tether IMU, planning taut-cable trajectories inside safe flight corridors whose convex-hull seeds carry different vertex sizes, and tracking the plan with an NMPC that encloses any bent cable in a conservative trapezoid. The paper reports 100% simulation success in narrow gaps down to 0.6 m and against poles as thin as 1 mm, with optimization speeds 1–3 orders of magnitude faster than Autotrans and Impactor, together with successful indoor and nighttime outdoor flights. Corridor inclusion lets the planner constrain only the quadrotor and pay

Load-bearing premise

The planning and whole-body safety guarantees are derived under the assumption that the cable stays taut throughout flight; if the cable bends in a way the catenary estimator does not capture (for example, out of the fitted plane), the planner's safety guarantee no longer holds and only a soft penalty in the controller remains.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Corridor-based planning avoids ESDF construction, so replanning runs in roughly 1–3 ms, enabling online replanning in large outdoor maps that would be too costly for dense signed-distance fields.
  • Whole-body safety for thin obstacles comes from convex-hull inclusion rather than dense cable sampling, yielding 100% success on 0.001-m poles without increasing computation time.
  • LiDAR-based perception removes the lighting dependence of vision-based slung-load estimation, supporting reliable day-and-night operation.
  • High-acceleration flight under taut-cable control can match the agility of bent-cable maneuvers while retaining full controllability, so the planner deliberately avoids bent-mode trajectories.
  • The NMPC with trapezoidal cable-bending envelopes provides, to the authors' knowledge, the first control-level obstacle avoidance under cable bending.
  • The full pipeline is validated in simulation and in indoor and nighttime outdoor flights, including a 25-m looped forest trajectory.
  • Corridor inclusion guarantees that the continuous trajectory—not just sampled points—remains collision-free, a stronger probabilistic safety assurance than ESDF-based sampling methods.
  • The corridor-based formulation reduces CPU and memory usage compared to ESDF-based baselines, making real-time performance feasible on an onboard NUC.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the corridor-inclusion safety guarantee is the real source of the speed-up, the same design could transfer to other multi-body robots—such as UAVs towing a hose or manipulators carrying a chain-like load—by generating convex-hull seeds per link and constraining only link vertices.
  • Because the planner intentionally never triggers bent-cable trajectories, the bending-safety layer is essentially a reactive control patch; a stronger extension would let the planner explicitly reason about inevitable bending, for example by generating a hybrid corridor set that remains feasible when wind exceeds the taut assumption.
  • The trapezoidal envelope is fitted to a cable that is assumed to lie in a single plane under uniform wind; in real turbulence with out-of-plane bending, the true cable may leave that envelope. A concrete test is to fly in a gusty crosswind while a motion-capture system records the true cable, and check whether the envelope still contains it.
  • The reported simulation maps are randomly generated with Perlin noise; the closest real-world evidence is a 25-m night forest loop. Scaling to kilometer-length missions would reveal whether MACIRI's corridor generation and the taut-cable planner hold up against rare, strong wind gusts and localization drift.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents Acetrans, a full autonomy stack for a quadrotor carrying a cable-suspended payload. The system has three main components: (i) a LiDAR-IMU perception module that estimates the payload pose and fits the cable shape in both taut and bent conditions, and filters cable points from the map; (ii) a corridor-based planning module, including the MACIRI algorithm for generating safe flight corridors with multi-size convex-hull seeds, and a MINCO trajectory optimizer that uses differential flatness of the taut-cable dynamics; and (iii) an NMPC controller that incorporates trapezoidal cable-bending envelopes to maintain whole-body safety during execution. The paper claims that this is the first fully autonomous suspended-load framework unifying perception, planning, and control, and that it achieves 1–3 orders of magnitude faster optimization than the Autotrans and Impactor baselines, with 100% success in narrow-gap and thin-pole simulations and successful indoor and nighttime outdoor flights.

Significance. If the claims hold, Acetrans would be a significant systems contribution: it is one of the few suspended-load pipelines that closes the perception-planning-control loop with onboard LiDAR, it extends corridor-based planning to multi-size convex-hull seeds, and it avoids cable sampling by exploiting convexity of the flight corridor. The paper contains useful and largely correct building blocks: the convex-inclusion argument of Section III-C is elementary but load-bearing; the differential-flatness derivation in Section III-B is standard; and the catenary fitting scheme in Section IV-B is a well-posed nested optimization with an explicit reparameterization. The simulation and hardware results, if reproducible, demonstrate a working system. The main weakness is that the paper's central safety claim—guaranteed whole-body safety under cable bending and external disturbances—is not backed by the formal statements in Sections V-D and VI, which rely on an unproven trapezoid-containment assumption and on soft penalty-based constraint enforcement. These gaps are substantial but addressable with additional analysis, experiments, or careful claim softening.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section VI, Eq. (67)] The NMPC safety argument depends on the assertion B ⊆ T, where B is the set of all UAV, payload, and bent-cable positions and T is the trapezoid constructed from the catenary fit of Section IV-B. This containment is asserted, not proved. The catenary model of Section IV-B assumes the cable lies in a plane and follows a catenary in a uniform resultant acceleration field (Eq. (20)). Real wind is nonuniform and time-varying, and aerodynamic drag is distributed along the cable, so the actual bent shape can leave the fitted plane and, potentially, leave T. If T fails to contain B, the constraints (69d) are applied to the wrong set and no safety guarantee remains. The planner's corridor guarantee (Eq. (56)) covers only the straight taut cable by convexity. Please either provide a theorem with explicit assumptions under which B ⊆ T provably holds, quantify the possible excursion with hardware m
  2. [Section V-D, Eqs. (52)-(56)] The paper claims in the Introduction and contributions that the planner guarantees whole-body safety, but the constraints are enforced as time-integral penalties with finite quadrature, not as hard constraints (Eqs. (53)-(55) and (62)). The text itself admits at the end of Section V-D that unsampled trajectory states are only 'highly likely' to be contained in the chain of convex hulls. Thus the formal statement does not match the 'guarantee' language. If a hard safety guarantee is intended, the trajectory should satisfy A_i x_Q(t) ≤ b_i and A_i x_L(t) ≤ b_i for all t, not only at quadrature points; otherwise the safety claim should be explicitly probabilistic or empirical.
  3. [Section IV-B.3, Eq. (20)] The catenary model assumes that the wind field exerts a force that is equal in magnitude and parallel on every infinitesimal cable segment, so the cable remains a catenary in a uniform resultant field. This is a strong modeling assumption: aerodynamic drag on a cable depends on the local relative velocity, the cable orientation, and the local wind field, so a nonuniform or unsteady wind will not produce a uniform resultant acceleration. The MuJoCo simulation in Section VII-B.2 provides some evidence for the fitting accuracy under the tested conditions, but it does not validate the containment assumption for outdoor wind. Please state the domain of validity of the catenary assumption and provide experimental evidence that the trapezoid envelope contains the real cable under the disturbances used in the indoor and outdoor flights.
  4. [Section III-B, Eqs. (3a)-(3c)] The differential flatness derivation includes F_Q and F_L as quantities that must be known for the flatness map, but the text then states that they are 'assumed to be constant during planning, such that their derivatives are 0.' This is a significant simplification: if the actual external forces vary along the trajectory, the reconstructed quadrotor position and thrust from the flat outputs will be inaccurate, which can affect both dynamic feasibility and the corridor constraints on x_Q. The paper should quantify the resulting error or justify why constant external forces are sufficient for the claimed safety and tracking performance.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section IV-A.4] The text refers to 'Section X' when introducing x_imu_L and x_lidar_L; this should reference Section IV-A.2.
  2. [General] There are several typos and formatting issues: 'Corrsponding' in the footnote, 'assuption' in Assumption 1, 'recently works' in Section II-C, and 'MIVE' instead of 'MVIE' in Algorithm 1 and surrounding text.
  3. [Table IV] The containment statistics table is difficult to read because the columns are packed without separators; please reformat the table and the surrounding text.
  4. [Section VII-D] The baseline comparisons for Autotrans involve a 'carefully tuned' additional safety margin of 0.4 m in the thin-pole experiments. This tuning should be described in more detail, including the tuning criterion, so that the comparison is reproducible and not perceived as favorable to the proposed method.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper's central derivations are self-contained or externally validated; the noted taut/bent gap is a soundness concern, not a definitional reduction.

full rationale

Acetrans does not fit a parameter and then rename that fit as a prediction. The corridor containment guarantee is an algorithmic invariant enforced by MACIRI's containment correction and by the convex-hull inclusion property (Sec. III-C); the planner's whole-body safety argument explicitly relies on taut-cable differential flatness (Sec. III-B, Sec. V-D), and the NMPC cable-bending constraints are asserted through Eq. (67) rather than derived from the fitted model. The bent-cable catenary estimator is validated against MuJoCo ground truth and motion-capture data, so it is not circularly defined as its own evidence. The baseline tuning of Autotrans's safety margin is a comparison-fairness issue, not a case of a fitted input being called a prediction. Self-citations to Autotrans/Impactor are used as baselines, not as load-bearing justification for the paper's claims. The main substantive weakness—that Eq. (67)'s B⊆T is unproved and the planning guarantee covers only the taut case—is a correctness or soundness gap, not a circularity, because no equation in the paper reduces to its own input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The central physical claim is a set of algorithmic design choices, not a new natural constant. The free parameters are the various thresholds and weights that any planner/estimator of this type must tune; they are not disclosed with values, so a reader cannot reproduce the exact reported behavior. The axioms are mostly standard dynamics and standard geometry, with the taut-cable-forever assumption, the constant wind assumption, and the attitude-alignment assumption being the ones most likely to break in the real world.

free parameters (7)
  • discrepancy threshold tau_d and covariance threshold tau_Sigma for taut/bent classification = not reported in text
    Section IV-A.4 defines the taut/bent switching rule with tau_d and tau_Sigma. Their values are not disclosed; per-frame classification depends on them.
  • N, minimum consecutive frames for taut/bent hysteresis = not reported
    Section IV-A.4. The switching robustness depends on N, and its value is not given.
  • beta and sigma in the anti-degeneracy notch term J_theta(alpha) = not reported
    Section IV-B.6, equation (30). The outer-loop alpha optimization is regularized by a Gaussian notch whose width and weight are free user choices.
  • weights w_p and w_L in inner catenary fitting = not reported
    Section IV-B.6, equation (31). The relative weight between the load-intercept residual and the cable-length residual is a free parameter.
  • cable point-cloud filter radii r_c and epsilon (noise margin) = not reported
    Section IV-C. The mask radius must be chosen larger than the cable radius plus a sensor-noise margin; the margin value is not quantified.
  • MINCO constraint weights chi and penalty weight lambda_s = not reported
    Section V-D, equations (53)-(62). The weighted penalty formulation depends on constraint weights and the slack weight; values are not given.
  • NMPC weight matrices Q, R, and decay rates b_x, b_u = not reported
    Section VI-B, equation (70). Exponential-decay weighting requires b_x and b_u; these are not reported.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption The taut-cable dynamics expressed in equations (1a)-(1g) correctly model the suspended-load system.
    Used throughout Section III-B as the basis for differential flatness and the trajectory optimization; it is carried from prior literature [26], [36] but asserted without experimental verification in this paper.
  • standard math Differential flatness of the taut-cable system with flat outputs [x_L, psi]
    Invoked in Section III-B to reduce the planning problem; this is an established result (Sreenath et al.), so it is a standard background assumption.
  • domain assumption The cable is assumed to remain taut for the entire planned trajectory (Section III-B); bent mode is never deliberately triggered.
    This is the deliberate design choice that makes the safety guarantee of Section V-D hold. It is explicit and acknowledged.
  • domain assumption External forces F_Q and F_L are constant during planning and their derivatives are zero.
    Section III-B, 'For simplicity and computational efficiency, the external forces F_Q and F_L are assumed to be constant during planning.' This weakens the claim of wind robustness, since real wind is time-varying.
  • domain assumption The payload attitude is identical to the cable-end attitude.
    Assumption 1, Section IV-A.1. Explicitly asserted, with the caveat that it holds only in the absence of significant impulsive forces.
  • domain assumption The bent cable follows a catenary in a uniform resultant acceleration field g = g_gravity + g_wind (Section IV-B.3).
    Wind is assumed to be uniform and parallel to gravity, which is an idealization; turbulent or non-uniform wind would break the catenary form.
  • standard math Convex-hull corridor inclusion implies whole-body safety (Section III-C).
    A valid convexity theorem. The unquantified gap is that the quadrotor and payload positions are two points in the corridor; the cable is a curve between them, and by convexity of the corridor it is contained.
invented entities (2)
  • MACIRI Multi-size-Aware Configuration-space Iterative Regional Inflation
    purpose: Generates safe flight corridors that account for different UAV and payload radii, and for general convex-hull or line-seed inputs.
    This is a new algorithmic entity whose only evidence is the paper's own simulation ablations; it has no falsifiable handle outside this paper, though it is reproducible through the equations.
  • Trapezoidal cable-bending envelope in NMPC
    purpose: A conservative convex envelope around the estimated bent cable shape to impose obstacle avoidance in the controller.
    The paper states B subseteq T (equation (67)) and then constrains only the four vertices, relying on the convexity of the trapezoid. The guarantee depends on the true cable being inside the trapezoid, which is assumed, not proven against a physics model.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Acetrans: An Autonomous Corridor-Based and Efficient UAV Suspended Transport System." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/L22HS6MK

@misc{pith2026250910349,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Acetrans: An Autonomous Corridor-Based and Efficient UAV Suspended Transport System},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/L22HS6MK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.10349}
}
read the original abstract

Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) with suspended payloads offer significant advantages for aerial transportation in complex and cluttered environments. However, existing systems face critical limitations, including unreliable perception of the cable-payload dynamics, inefficient planning in large-scale environments, and the inability to guarantee whole-body safety under cable bending and external disturbances. This paper presents Acetrans, an Autonomous, Corridor-based, and Efficient UAV suspended transport system that addresses these challenges through a unified perception, planning, and control framework. A LiDAR-IMU fusion module is proposed to jointly estimate both payload pose and cable shape under taut and bent modes, enabling robust whole-body state estimation and real-time filtering of cable point clouds. To enhance planning scalability, we introduce the Multi-size-Aware Configuration-space Iterative Regional Inflation (MACIRI) algorithm, which generates safe flight corridors while accounting for varying UAV and payload geometries. A spatio-temporal, corridor-constrained trajectory optimization scheme is then developed to ensure dynamically feasible and collision-free trajectories. Finally, a nonlinear model predictive controller (NMPC) augmented with cable-bending constraints provides robust whole-body safety during execution. Simulation and experimental results validate the effectiveness of Acetrans, demonstrating substantial improvements in perception accuracy, planning efficiency, and control safety compared to state-of-the-art methods.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.10349 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Trajectory of the payload in the XY plane in estimation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Trajectory of the payload in the Z axis in estimation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Volume comparison of different methods at different size ratios. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Computation time comparison of different methods at different size ratios. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Trajectory generated by the proposed planner in pillar [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_6.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Trajectory generated by the proposed planner for a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Trajectory generated by the proposed planner in an [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_9.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Visualization of the indoor experimental corridor [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_11.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Simulation setup for evaluating cable-bending obstacle [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_10.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Experimental snapshot demonstrating the trajectory [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Experimental snapshot demonstrating the trajectory [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: The rviz visualization of the outdoor experiment. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_15.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references

  1. [1]

    Modernising delivery: A low-energy tethered package system using fixed-wing drones,

    S. Ord, M. Marino, and T. Wiley, “Modernising delivery: A low-energy tethered package system using fixed-wing drones,” inIEEE/RSJ Intl. Conf. on Intell. Robots and Syst. (IROS), 2024, pp. 2271–2277

    2024

  2. [2]

    Smooth switched flight control design of fixed-wing aircraft for heavy payload airdrop,

    Y . Liang, Y . Dong, Y . Han, T. Gao, Y . Ma, B. Yang, and L. Zhang, “Smooth switched flight control design of fixed-wing aircraft for heavy payload airdrop,” inChinese Control and Decision Conf. (CCDC), 2024, pp. 578–585

    2024

  3. [3]

    A dexterous and compliant aerial continuum manipulator for cluttered and constrained environments,

    R. Peng, Y . Wang, M. Lu, and P. Lu, “A dexterous and compliant aerial continuum manipulator for cluttered and constrained environments,” Nature Communications, vol. 16, no. 1, p. 889, Jan 2025

    2025

  4. [4]

    Origami exoskeletons for enhanced soft robotic manipulation,

    K. Fu, X. Wu, S. Yu, Q. Zhang, Y . Yang, T. Xu, W. Yao, T. Yi, H. Li, Y . Chen, X. Zhang, and X. Chen, “Origami exoskeletons for enhanced soft robotic manipulation,”Science Advances, vol. 11, no. 31, p. eadv6629, 2025

    2025

  5. [5]

    Powerful uav manipulation via bioinspired self-adaptive soft self-contained gripper,

    X. Guo, W. Tang, K. Qin, Y . Zhong, H. Xu, Y . Qu, Z. Li, Q. Sheng, Y . Gao, H. Yang, and J. Zou, “Powerful uav manipulation via bioinspired self-adaptive soft self-contained gripper,”Science Advances, vol. 10, no. 19, p. eadn6642, 2024

    2024

  6. [6]

    Trajectory generation for swing- free maneuvers of a quadrotor with suspended payload: A dynamic programming approach,

    I. Palunko, R. Fierro, and P. Cruz, “Trajectory generation for swing- free maneuvers of a quadrotor with suspended payload: A dynamic programming approach,” inIEEE Intl. Conf. on Robot. and Autom. (ICRA), 2012, pp. 2691–2697

    2012

  7. [7]

    Trajectory generation and control of a quadrotor with a cable-suspended load - A differentially- flat hybrid system,

    K. Sreenath, N. Michael, and V . Kumar, “Trajectory generation and control of a quadrotor with a cable-suspended load - A differentially- flat hybrid system,” inIEEE Intl. Conf. on Robot. and Autom. (ICRA), 2013, pp. 4888–4895

    2013

  8. [8]

    Fast trajectory optimization for agile quadrotor maneuvers with a cable- suspended payload,

    P. Foehn, D. Falanga, N. Kuppuswamy, R. Tedrake, and D. Scaramuzza, “Fast trajectory optimization for agile quadrotor maneuvers with a cable- suspended payload,” inProc. of Robot.: Sci. and Syst. (RSS), vol. 13, 2017

    2017

Show all 46 references
  1. [9]

    Aggressive flight with suspended payloads using vision-based control,

    S. Tang, V . W ¨uest, and V . Kumar, “Aggressive flight with suspended payloads using vision-based control,”IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. (RA-L), vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 1152–1159, 2018

    2018

  2. [10]

    Vision-encoder-based payload state estimation for autonomous mav with a suspended payload,

    Y . Ren, J. Liu, H. Chen, and Y . Liu, “Vision-encoder-based payload state estimation for autonomous mav with a suspended payload,” inIEEE/RSJ Intl. Conf. on Intell. Robots and Syst. (IROS), 2021, pp. 9632–9638

    2021

  3. [11]

    A motion control framework for au- tonomous water sampling and swing-free transportation of a multirotor uav with a cable-suspended mechanism,

    F. Panetsos, G. Karras, K. Kyriakopoulos, O. Oikonomides, P. Kolios, D. Eliades, and C. Panayiotou, “A motion control framework for au- tonomous water sampling and swing-free transportation of a multirotor uav with a cable-suspended mechanism,”Journal of Field Robotics, vol. 4...

    2023

  4. [12]

    Vision-based parameter estimation of a slung load,

    J. J. Naundrup, J. D. Bendtsen, and A. La Cour-Harbo, “Vision-based parameter estimation of a slung load,” inInternational Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems. (ICUAS), 2024, pp. 1216–1223

    2024

  5. [13]

    Aerial transportation of cable-suspended loads with an event camera,

    F. Panetsos, G. C. Karras, and K. J. Kyriakopoulos, “Aerial transportation of cable-suspended loads with an event camera,”IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. (RA-L), vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 231–238, 2024

    2024

  6. [14]

    Autonomous swing-angle estimation for stable slung-load flight of multi-rotor uavs,

    S. J. Lee and H. J. Kim, “Autonomous swing-angle estimation for stable slung-load flight of multi-rotor uavs,” inIEEE Intl. Conf. on Robot. and Autom. (ICRA), 2017, pp. 4576–4581

    2017

  7. [15]

    A robust observer- based nonlinear trajectory tracking control strategy for a quadrotor with a suspended payload,

    H. Li, X. Hou, J. Gao, Y . Lv, J. Sha, and H. Zhong, “A robust observer- based nonlinear trajectory tracking control strategy for a quadrotor with a suspended payload,” inIEEE International Conference on Mechatronics and Automation (ICMA), 2023, pp. 858–864

    2023

  8. [16]

    Real-time optimal planning and model predictive control of a multi-rotor with a suspended load,

    C. Y . Son, D. Jang, H. Seo, T. Kim, H. Lee, and H. J. Kim, “Real-time optimal planning and model predictive control of a multi-rotor with a suspended load,” inIEEE Intl. Conf. on Robot. and Autom. (ICRA), 2019, pp. 5665–5671

    2019

  9. [17]

    Impact-aware planning and control for aerial robots with suspended payloads,

    H. Wang, H. Li, B. Zhou, F. Gao, and S. Shen, “Impact-aware planning and control for aerial robots with suspended payloads,”IEEE Transac- tions on Robotics, vol. 40, pp. 2478–2497, 2024

    2024

  10. [18]

    Mixed integer quadratic program trajectory generation for a quadrotor with a cable-suspended payload,

    S. Tang and V . Kumar, “Mixed integer quadratic program trajectory generation for a quadrotor with a cable-suspended payload,” inIEEE Intl. Conf. on Robot. and Autom. (ICRA), 2015, pp. 2216–2222

    2015

  11. [19]

    Differential flatness based path planning with direct collocation on hybrid modes for a quadrotor with a cable-suspended payload,

    J. Zeng, P. Kotaru, M. W. Mueller, and K. Sreenath, “Differential flatness based path planning with direct collocation on hybrid modes for a quadrotor with a cable-suspended payload,”IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. (RA-L), vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 3074–3081, 2020

    2020

  12. [20]

    Real-time optimal trajectory generation and control of a multi-rotor with a suspended load for obstacle avoidance,

    C. Y . Son, H. Seo, D. Jang, and H. J. Kim, “Real-time optimal trajectory generation and control of a multi-rotor with a suspended load for obstacle avoidance,”IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. (RA-L), vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 1915–1922, 2020

    1915

  13. [21]

    Online trajectory planning and control of a mav payload system in dynamic environ- ments,

    N. D. Potdar, G. C. de Croon, and J. Alonso-Mora, “Online trajectory planning and control of a mav payload system in dynamic environ- ments,”Autonomous Robots, vol. 44, pp. 1065–1089, 2020

    2020

  14. [22]

    Autotrans: A complete planning and control framework for autonomous uav payload transportation,

    H. Li, H. Wang, C. Feng, F. Gao, B. Zhou, and S. Shen, “Autotrans: A complete planning and control framework for autonomous uav payload transportation,”IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 8, no. 10, pp. 6859–6866, 2023

    2023

  15. [23]

    Planning dynamically feasible trajectories for quadrotors using safe flight corridors in 3-d complex environments,

    S. Liu, M. Watterson, K. Mohta, K. Sun, S. Bhattacharya, C. J. Taylor, and V . Kumar, “Planning dynamically feasible trajectories for quadrotors using safe flight corridors in 3-d complex environments,”IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. (RA-L), vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 1688–1695, 2017

    2017

  16. [24]

    Geometrically constrained tra- jectory optimization for multicopters,

    Z. Wang, X. Zhou, C. Xu, and F. Gao, “Geometrically constrained tra- jectory optimization for multicopters,”IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 3259–3278, 2022

    2022

  17. [25]

    Safety-assured high-speed navigation for mavs,

    Y . Ren, F. Zhu, G. Lu, Y . Cai, L. Yin, F. Kong, J. Lin, N. Chen, and F. Zhang, “Safety-assured high-speed navigation for mavs,”Science Robotics, vol. 10, no. 98, p. eado6187, 2025

    2025

  18. [26]

    Trajectory generation and control of a quadrotor with a cable-suspended load - a differentially-flat hybrid system,

    K. Sreenath, N. Michael, and V . Kumar, “Trajectory generation and control of a quadrotor with a cable-suspended load - a differentially-flat hybrid system,” inIEEE Intl. Conf. on Robot. and Autom. (ICRA), 2013, pp. 4888–4895

    2013

  19. [27]

    Fast-lio2: Fast direct lidar- inertial odometry,

    W. Xu, Y . Cai, D. He, J. Lin, and F. Zhang, “Fast-lio2: Fast direct lidar- inertial odometry,”IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 2053–2073, 2022

  20. [28]

    Visual servoing- based anti-swing control of cable-suspended aerial transportation sys- tems with variable-length cable,

    H. Yu, Z. Zhang, T. Pei, J. Han, Y . Fang, and X. Liang, “Visual servoing- based anti-swing control of cable-suspended aerial transportation sys- tems with variable-length cable,”IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering, vol. 22, pp. 5955–5965, 2025

    2025

  21. [29]

    Online whole-body motion planning for quadrotor using multi-resolution search,

    Y . Ren, S. Liang, F. Zhu, G. Lu, and F. Zhang, “Online whole-body motion planning for quadrotor using multi-resolution search,” inIEEE Intl. Conf. on Robot. and Autom. (ICRA), 2023, pp. 1594–1600

    2023

  22. [30]

    Faster: Fast and safe trajectory planner for navigation in unknown environments,

    J. Tordesillas, B. T. Lopez, M. Everett, and J. P. How, “Faster: Fast and safe trajectory planner for navigation in unknown environments,”IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 922–938, 2022

    2022

  23. [31]

    Decentralized swarm trajectory generation for lidar-based aerial tracking in cluttered environ- ments,

    L. Yin, F. Zhu, Y . Ren, F. Kong, and F. Zhang, “Decentralized swarm trajectory generation for lidar-based aerial tracking in cluttered environ- ments,” inIEEE/RSJ Intl. Conf. on Intell. Robots and Syst. (IROS), 2023, pp. 9285–9292

    2023

  24. [32]

    Integrated planning and control for quadrotor navigation in presence of suddenly appearing objects and disturbances,

    W. Liu, Y . Ren, and F. Zhang, “Integrated planning and control for quadrotor navigation in presence of suddenly appearing objects and disturbances,”IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. (RA-L), 2023

    2023

  25. [33]

    Elastic tracker: A spatio-temporal trajectory planner for flexible aerial tracking,

    J. Ji, N. Pan, C. Xu, and F. Gao, “Elastic tracker: A spatio-temporal trajectory planner for flexible aerial tracking,” inIEEE Intl. Conf. on Robot. and Autom. (ICRA), 2022, pp. 47–53

    2022

  26. [34]

    Deits and R

    R. Deits and R. Tedrake,Computing Large Convex Regions of Obstacle- Free Space Through Semidefinite Programming. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2015, pp. 109–124

    2015

  27. [35]

    Fast iterative region inflation for computing large 23 2-d/3-d convex regions of obstacle-free space,

    Q. Wang, Z. Wang, M. Wang, J. Ji, Z. Han, T. Wu, R. Jin, Y . Gao, C. Xu, and F. Gao, “Fast iterative region inflation for computing large 23 2-d/3-d convex regions of obstacle-free space,”IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 41, pp. 3223–3243, 2025

    2025

  28. [36]

    Geometric control and differential flatness of a quadrotor uav with a cable-suspended load,

    K. Sreenath, T. Lee, and V . Kumar, “Geometric control and differential flatness of a quadrotor uav with a cable-suspended load,” inIEEE Control and Decision Conf. (CDC), 2013, pp. 2269–2274

    2013

  29. [37]

    Minimum snap trajectory generation and control for quadrotors,

    D. Mellinger and V . Kumar, “Minimum snap trajectory generation and control for quadrotors,” inIEEE Intl. Conf. on Robot. and Autom. (ICRA), 2011, pp. 2520–2525

    2011

  30. [38]

    Fast-lio: A fast, robust lidar-inertial odometry package by tightly-coupled iterated kalman filter,

    W. Xu and F. Zhang, “Fast-lio: A fast, robust lidar-inertial odometry package by tightly-coupled iterated kalman filter,”IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. (RA-L), vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 3317–3324, 2021

    2021

  31. [39]

    Fec: Fast euclidean clustering for point cloud segmentation,

    Y . Cao, Y . Wang, Y . Xue, H. Zhang, and Y . Lao, “Fec: Fast euclidean clustering for point cloud segmentation,”Drones, vol. 6, no. 11, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.mdpi.com/2504-446X/6/11/325

    2022

  32. [40]

    Lio-sam: Tightly-coupled lidar inertial odometry via smoothing and mapping,

    T. Shan, B. Englot, D. Meyers, W. Wang, C. Ratti, and R. Daniela, “Lio-sam: Tightly-coupled lidar inertial odometry via smoothing and mapping,” inIEEE/RSJ Intl. Conf. on Intell. Robots and Syst. (IROS). IEEE, 2020, pp. 5135–5142

    2020

  33. [41]

    On the limited memory bfgs method for large scale optimization,

    D. C. Liu and J. Nocedal, “On the limited memory bfgs method for large scale optimization,”Mathematical Programming, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 503–528, Aug 1989. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01589116

    1989 doi

  34. [42]

    An efficient spatial-temporal trajectory planner for autonomous vehicles in unstructured environments,

    Z. Han, Y . Wu, T. Li, L. Zhang, L. Pei, L. Xu, C. Li, C. Ma, C. Xu, S. Shen, and F. Gao, “An efficient spatial-temporal trajectory planner for autonomous vehicles in unstructured environments,”IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 1797–1...

    2024

  35. [43]

    Use of exponential data weighting in model predictive control design,

    L. Wang, “Use of exponential data weighting in model predictive control design,” inIEEE Control and Decision Conf. (CDC), vol. 5, 2001, pp. 4857–4862 vol.5

    2001

  36. [44]

    Robust receding horizon predictive control for systems with uncertain dynamics and input saturation,

    Y . I. Lee and B. Kouvaritakis, “Robust receding horizon predictive control for systems with uncertain dynamics and input saturation,” Automatica, vol. 36, no. 10, pp. 1497–1504, 2000. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0005109800000649

    2000

  37. [45]

    Mujoco: A physics engine for model- based control,

    E. Todorov, T. Erez, and Y . Tassa, “Mujoco: A physics engine for model- based control,” inIEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems. IEEE, 2012, pp. 5026–5033

    2012

  38. [46]

    Perlin noise pixel shaders,

    J. C. Hart, “Perlin noise pixel shaders,” inProceedings of the ACM SIGGRAPH/EUROGRAPHICS Workshop on Graphics Hardware, ser. HWWS ’01. New York, NY , USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2001, p. 87–94

    2001

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.