pith. sign in

arxiv: 2507.11889 · v2 · submitted 2025-07-16 · 💻 cs.RO

NemeSys: Toward Online Underwater Exploration with Remote Operator-in-the-loop Adaptive Autonomy

Adnan Abdullah , Alankrit Gupta , Vaishnav Ramesh , Shivali Patel , Md Jahidul Islam This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-19 05:12 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.RO
keywords autonomous underwater vehiclesadaptive autonomymagnetoelectric signalingmission reconfigurationremote operatoredge computingunderwater robotics
0
0 comments X

The pith

NemeSys lets remote operators retask underwater vehicles mid-mission via magnetoelectric signals.

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

The paper introduces NemeSys as a system for autonomous underwater vehicles that supports dynamic mission changes during operation instead of fixed pre-programmed paths. It uses compact magnetoelectric signaling to carry updates from a remote operator over low-bandwidth links that avoid the delays of acoustic channels or tethers. Validation covers analytical models, digital-twin simulations, tank tests, and open-water trials, with results showing task switches under 50 milliseconds and a 13.2 MB peak computing load. A sympathetic reader would care because this setup could make marine exploration more responsive to new goals or conditions without returning to shore or using heavy communication equipment.

Core claim

NemeSys is a novel AUV system designed to support real-time mission reconfiguration through compact magnetoelectric signaling. The full system design, control architecture, and mission encoding framework enable interactive exploration and task adaptation via low-bandwidth communication. Validation through analytical modeling, controlled simulation tests, and real-world trials shows that mid-mission retasking scenarios achieve behavior switching latency below 50 ms with only a 13.2 MB peak computational overhead on the digital twin, while laboratory tank tests and open-water field trials confirm stable control and reliable execution in dynamic environments.

What carries the argument

The magnetoelectric signaling channel combined with a mission encoding framework that carries operator commands for mid-mission retasking.

If this is right

  • Behavior switching latency remains below 50 ms during mid-mission retasking scenarios.
  • Peak computational overhead stays at 13.2 MB, which fits deployment on edge computing hardware.
  • Stable control and reliable mission execution are maintained in laboratory tank tests and open-water field trials.
  • Online mission reconfiguration becomes feasible for responsive and goal-driven adaptive underwater autonomy.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • This approach could reduce the need for exhaustive pre-mission planning when environments change unpredictably.
  • The same low-latency channel might support adaptive control in other settings with limited communication such as caves or space.
  • Adding onboard detection of environmental shifts could let the vehicle propose its own retasks to the operator.

Load-bearing premise

The magnetoelectric signaling channel remains reliable and low-latency under real-world underwater conditions including variable salinity, turbidity, and vehicle motion.

What would settle it

A trial that records signal loss or behavior switching latency above 50 ms when salinity, turbidity, or motion varies would show the claims do not hold for field use.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.11889 by Adnan Abdullah, Alankrit Gupta, Md Jahidul Islam, Shivali Patel, Vaishnav Ramesh.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: A few snapshots of the NemeSys AUV system operat [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: System design and computational components of the NemeSys AUV: (a) The physical robot; (b) Isometric view of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Data flow among the perception, communication, and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The mission encoding and decoding scheme for ME-based adaptive control is shown. Pattern types and associated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The three design architectures are compared for hydrodynamic stability and maneuverability. The configurations illustrate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Snapshots of passive stability test under external disturbances: Cfg #2 exhibits unstable behavior, flipping upside down [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The choice of error correction strength T = 2 offers a favorable trade-off: it improves decoding success over T = 1 at more commonly encountered low BER region, with higher efficiency compared to stronger codes with T > 2. vertical distance between CB and CG, with a positive value indicating CB lies above CG. As described in Sec. IV-C, maneuverability is evaluated using two key metrics: heave rate and yaw … view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Our depth controller’s response over 1-minute interval is shown. The AUV reaches target depth in 6 seconds and maintains the steady-state deviation within ±3 cm [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: A sample pattern (square) being executed by the NemeSys, illustrated by the sparse 3D map and AUV trajectory, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Digital twin of NemeSys is shown in three virtual [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_10.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Adaptive mission control and dynamic parameter reconfiguration are essential for autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs) operating in GPS-denied, communication-limited marine environments. However, AUV platforms generally execute static, pre-programmed missions or rely on tethered connections and high-latency acoustic channels for mid-mission updates, significantly limiting their adaptability and responsiveness. In this paper, we introduce NemeSys, a novel AUV system designed to support real-time mission reconfiguration through compact magnetoelectric (ME) signaling. We present the full system design, control architecture, and a mission encoding framework that enables interactive exploration and task adaptation via low-bandwidth communication. The proposed system is validated through analytical modeling, controlled simulation tests, and real-world trials. The mid-mission retasking scenarios, evaluated using the NemeSys digital twin, demonstrate behavior switching latency below 50 ms with only a 13.2 MB peak computational overhead, making the framework suitable for deployment on edge computing hardware. Laboratory tank tests and open-water field trials further confirm stable control and reliable mission execution in dynamic underwater environments. These results establish the feasibility of online mission reconfiguration and highlight NemeSys as a promising step toward responsive, goal-driven adaptive underwater autonomy.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper introduces NemeSys, a novel AUV system architecture supporting real-time mission reconfiguration via compact magnetoelectric (ME) signaling in GPS-denied, communication-limited underwater environments. It describes the full system design, control architecture, and mission encoding framework, with validation through analytical modeling, simulation using a digital twin (reporting sub-50 ms behavior switching latency and 13.2 MB peak overhead), and real-world laboratory tank tests plus open-water field trials that confirm stable control and reliable mission execution.

Significance. If the performance claims hold under realistic conditions, NemeSys could enable more responsive, operator-in-the-loop adaptive autonomy for underwater exploration by replacing high-latency acoustic links or tethers with low-bandwidth ME signaling. The digital twin evaluation of mid-mission retasking scenarios provides a reproducible testbed that strengthens the simulation-based results.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and Validation sections] Abstract and Validation sections: The central performance claims of behavior switching latency below 50 ms and 13.2 MB peak computational overhead are reported from the digital twin and field trials, yet no error bars, sample sizes, number of trials, or statistical comparisons against baselines (e.g., acoustic channels) are provided. This leaves the suitability for edge hardware deployment without quantitative support for variability or repeatability.
  2. [Field trials description] Field trials description: The open-water trials are stated to confirm 'reliable mission execution in dynamic underwater environments,' but no metrics tied to ME channel performance (packet success rate, latency variance, bit-error rates) under controlled variations in salinity, turbidity, or vehicle motion are reported. Without these, the transfer from digital twin results to physical deployment remains unverified and load-bearing for the feasibility conclusion.
minor comments (2)
  1. [System Design] The mission encoding framework would benefit from an explicit example or pseudocode to illustrate how tasks are mapped to the low-bandwidth ME channel.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions for the digital twin architecture and latency plots should include axis units and a brief description of what is being compared.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback on the quantitative rigor of our validation results. We have reviewed the manuscript in light of these comments and will make targeted revisions to improve clarity and support for the reported performance claims without altering the core contributions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and Validation sections] Abstract and Validation sections: The central performance claims of behavior switching latency below 50 ms and 13.2 MB peak computational overhead are reported from the digital twin and field trials, yet no error bars, sample sizes, number of trials, or statistical comparisons against baselines (e.g., acoustic channels) are provided. This leaves the suitability for edge hardware deployment without quantitative support for variability or repeatability.

    Authors: We agree that additional statistical details would strengthen the presentation. The digital twin results summarized in the Validation section aggregate outcomes across multiple simulation runs, but the manuscript does not explicitly report sample sizes, variability measures, or direct comparisons. In the revised manuscript we will expand the Validation section to include the number of trials performed, error bars on latency and overhead figures, and a brief comparison against representative acoustic channel latencies drawn from the literature. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Field trials description] Field trials description: The open-water trials are stated to confirm 'reliable mission execution in dynamic underwater environments,' but no metrics tied to ME channel performance (packet success rate, latency variance, bit-error rates) under controlled variations in salinity, turbidity, or vehicle motion are reported. Without these, the transfer from digital twin results to physical deployment remains unverified and load-bearing for the feasibility conclusion.

    Authors: The open-water field trials were intended to demonstrate overall system functionality and stable control under real conditions rather than to provide exhaustive channel characterization. Laboratory tank tests included some controlled environmental factors, while the digital twin captured modeled channel effects. We will revise the Field trials description to clarify this scope, report any basic success-rate observations recorded during the trials, and note the limitations of the field data with respect to systematic salinity/turbidity sweeps. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: performance metrics reported from empirical evaluation

full rationale

The paper introduces a system architecture for real-time AUV mission reconfiguration via magnetoelectric signaling and validates claims through analytical modeling, digital twin simulations, and physical trials. Key figures such as sub-50 ms behavior switching latency and 13.2 MB overhead are presented as measured outcomes from the NemeSys digital twin evaluations and field tests rather than quantities derived from equations or parameters defined within the paper. No load-bearing derivation steps reduce by construction to self-defined inputs, fitted constants, or self-citation chains; the central results remain independent empirical observations.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard assumptions about underwater channel behavior and the fidelity of the digital twin; no new physical constants or ad-hoc fitted parameters are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Magnetoelectric signals propagate reliably through seawater at the distances and frequencies used by the hardware.
    Invoked when claiming real-time retasking is feasible in open-water trials.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5758 in / 1274 out tokens · 30275 ms · 2026-05-19T05:12:32.192346+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

78 extracted references · 78 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Seaglider: a long-range autonomous underwater vehicle for oceanographic research,

    C. Eriksen, T. Osse, R. Light, T. Wen, T. Lehman, P. Sabin, J. Ballard, and A. Chiodi, “Seaglider: a long-range autonomous underwater vehicle for oceanographic research,” IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering , vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 424–436, 2001

    work page 2001

  2. [2]

    Autonomous underwater vehicles for scientific and naval operations,

    E. Bovio, D. Cecchi, and F. Baralli, “Autonomous underwater vehicles for scientific and naval operations,” Annual Reviews in Control, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 117–130, 2006

    work page 2006

  3. [3]

    Human-Machine Interfaces for Subsea Telerobotics: From Soda-straw to Natural Language Interactions,

    A. Abdullah, R. Chen, D. Blow, T. Uthai, E. J. Du, and M. J. Islam, “Human-Machine Interfaces for Subsea Telerobotics: From Soda-straw to Natural Language Interactions,” In review at IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems (T-HMS), ArXiv:2412.01753 , 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  4. [4]

    Virtual Telepresence for the Future of ROV Teleoperations: Opportunities and Challenges,

    P. Xia, K. McSweeney, F. Wen, Z. Song, M. Krieg, S. Li, X. Yu, K. Crippen, J. Adams, and E. J. Du, “Virtual Telepresence for the Future of ROV Teleoperations: Opportunities and Challenges,” in SNAME Offshore Symposium, p. D011S001R001, SNAME, 2022

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    Word2Wave: Language Driven Mission Programming for Efficient Subsea Deploy- ments of Marine Robots,

    R. Chen, D. Blow, A. Abdullah, and M. J. Islam, “Word2Wave: Language Driven Mission Programming for Efficient Subsea Deploy- ments of Marine Robots,” in International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), IEEE, 2025

    work page 2025

  6. [6]

    Dynamic Reconfiguration of Mis- sion Parameters in Underwater Human-Robot Collaboration,

    M. J. Islam, M. Ho, and J. Sattar, “Dynamic Reconfiguration of Mis- sion Parameters in Underwater Human-Robot Collaboration,” in IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) , 2018

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    On the human–machine interaction of unmanned aerial system mission specialists,

    J. M. Peschel and R. R. Murphy, “On the human–machine interaction of unmanned aerial system mission specialists,” IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 53–62, 2013

    work page 2013

  8. [8]

    Adaptive teams of autonomous aerial and ground robots for situational awareness,

    M. A. Hsieh, A. Cowley, J. F. Keller, L. Chaimowicz, B. Grocholsky, V . Kumar, C. J. Taylor, Y . Endo, R. C. Arkin, B. Jung, D. F. Wolf, G. S. Sukhatme, and D. C. MacKenzie, “Adaptive teams of autonomous aerial and ground robots for situational awareness,” Journal of Field Robotics, vol. 24, no. 11-12, pp. 991–1014, 2007

    work page 2007

  9. [9]

    The impact of the underwater environment salinity during the inspections carried out with eps vision 1712 in black sea,

    H. Isac, A. C. Lazaroiu, and V . Mocanu, “The impact of the underwater environment salinity during the inspections carried out with eps vision 1712 in black sea,” in 2024 5th International Conference on Communi- cations, Information, Electronic and Energy Systems (CIEES) , pp. 1–6, 2024

    work page 2024

  10. [10]

    An interference-aware and collision-free mac protocol for underwater wireless sensor networks,

    R. Zhu, A. Boukerche, and Q. Yang, “An interference-aware and collision-free mac protocol for underwater wireless sensor networks,” ACM Trans. Sen. Netw. , vol. 21, May 2025

    work page 2025

  11. [11]

    BlueME: Robust Underwater Robot-to-Robot Communication Using Compact Magneto- electric Antennas.,

    M. Talebi, S. Mahmud, A. Khalifa, and M. J. Islam, “BlueME: Robust Underwater Robot-to-Robot Communication Using Compact Magneto- electric Antennas.,” In review at IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering (JOE). ArXiv:2411.09241, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  12. [12]

    A review of underwater robot localization in confined spaces,

    H. Wu, Y . Chen, Q. Yang, B. Yan, and X. Yang, “A review of underwater robot localization in confined spaces,” Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, vol. 12, no. 3, p. 428, 2024

    work page 2024

  13. [13]

    Visual slam for underwater vehicles: A survey,

    S. Zhang, S. Zhao, D. An, J. Liu, H. Wang, Y . Feng, D. Li, and R. Zhao, “Visual slam for underwater vehicles: A survey,” Computer Science Review, vol. 46, p. 100510, 2022

    work page 2022

  14. [14]

    Robot-to-robot Relative Pose Esti- mation using Humans as Markers,

    M. J. Islam, J. Mo, and J. Sattar, “Robot-to-robot Relative Pose Esti- mation using Humans as Markers,” Autonomous Robots, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 579–593, 2021

    work page 2021

  15. [15]

    Cooperative artificial in- telligence for underwater robotic swarm,

    W. Cai, Z. Liu, M. Zhang, and C. Wang, “Cooperative artificial in- telligence for underwater robotic swarm,” Robotics and Autonomous Systems, vol. 164, p. 104410, 2023

    work page 2023

  16. [16]

    Demonstrating CavePI: Autonomous Exploration of Underwater Caves by Semantic Guidance,

    A. Gupta, A. Abdullah, X. Li, V . Ramesh, I. Rekleitis, and M. J. Islam, “Demonstrating CavePI: Autonomous Exploration of Underwater Caves by Semantic Guidance,” in Robotics: Science and Systems (RSS) , 2025

    work page 2025

  17. [17]

    Deepurl: Deep pose estimation framework for underwater relative localization,

    B. Joshi, M. Modasshir, T. Manderson, H. Damron, M. Xanthidis, A. Quattrini Li, I. Rekleitis, and G. Dudek, “Deepurl: Deep pose estimation framework for underwater relative localization,” in IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), (Las Vegas, NV), pp. 1777–1784, 2020

    work page 2020

  18. [18]

    Multi-robot exploration of underwater structures,

    M. Xanthidis, B. Joshi, J. M. O’Kane, and I. Rekleitis, “Multi-robot exploration of underwater structures,” IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 55, no. 31, pp. 395–400, 2022

    work page 2022

  19. [19]

    On a class of error correcting binary group codes,

    R. C. Bose and D. K. Ray-Chaudhuri, “On a class of error correcting binary group codes,” Information and control , vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 68–79, 1960

    work page 1960

  20. [20]

    Sun- fish®: A human-portable exploration auv for complex 3d environments,

    K. Richmond, C. Flesher, L. Lindzey, N. Tanner, and W. C. Stone, “Sun- fish®: A human-portable exploration auv for complex 3d environments,” in OCEANS 2018 MTS/IEEE Charleston , pp. 1–9, IEEE, 2018

    work page 2018

  21. [21]

    Curee: A curious underwater robot for ecosystem exploration,

    Y . Girdhar, N. McGuire, L. Cai, S. Jamieson, S. McCammon, B. Claus, J. E. San Soucie, J. E. Todd, and T. A. Mooney, “Curee: A curious underwater robot for ecosystem exploration,” in2023 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) , pp. 11411–11417, IEEE, 2023

    work page 2023

  22. [22]

    Ux 1 system design-a robotic system for underwater mining exploration,

    A. Martins, J. Almeida, C. Almeida, A. Dias, N. Dias, J. Aaltonen, A. Heininen, K. T. Koskinen, C. Rossi, S. Dominguez, et al. , “Ux 1 system design-a robotic system for underwater mining exploration,” in 2018 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pp. 1494–1500, IEEE, 2018

    work page 2018

  23. [23]

    A review of subsea auv technology,

    J. Zhou, Y . Si, and Y . Chen, “A review of subsea auv technology,” Journal of Marine Science and Engineering , vol. 11, no. 6, p. 1119, 2023

    work page 2023

  24. [24]

    Design and development of an autonomous underwater vehicle (auv-fkeutem),

    M. S. M. Aras, H. Kasdirin, M. H. Jamaluddin, M. F. Basar, and U. Elektrik, “Design and development of an autonomous underwater vehicle (auv-fkeutem),” in Proceedings of MUCEET2009 Malaysian Technical Universities Conference on Engineering and Technology, MUCEET2009, MS Garden, Kuantan, Pahang, Malaysia , vol. 1, 2009

    work page 2009

  25. [25]

    Techniques for deep sea near bottom survey using an autonomous underwater vehicle,

    D. R. Yoerger, M. Jakuba, A. M. Bradley, and B. Bingham, “Techniques for deep sea near bottom survey using an autonomous underwater vehicle,” in International Symposium on Underwater Technology, IEEE, 2007

    work page 2007

  26. [26]

    Remus: A small, low-cost auv; system description, field trials and performance results,

    B. Allen, T. Austin, R. Stokey, N. Forrester, R. Goldsborough, M. Pur- cell, and C. von Alt, “Remus: A small, low-cost auv; system description, field trials and performance results,” Proceedings of the IEEE/MTS Oceans Conference, vol. 1, pp. 450–455, 2001

    work page 2001

  27. [27]

    Map-based localization and mission planning for auvs in current fields,

    H. Singh, N. Leonard, and et al., “Map-based localization and mission planning for auvs in current fields,” in OCEANS 2007, IEEE

    work page 2007

  28. [28]

    Mh370 - definition of underwater search areas,

    A. T. S. Bureau, “Mh370 - definition of underwater search areas,” 2014. https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/2014/ mh370-definition-of-underwater-search-areas

    work page 2014

  29. [29]

    NemoSens: An Open-Architecture, Cost-Effective, and Modu- lar Micro-AUV

    R. Inc., “NemoSens: An Open-Architecture, Cost-Effective, and Modu- lar Micro-AUV.” https://rtsys.eu/nemosens-micro-auv, 2020

    work page 2020

  30. [30]

    Aqua: An amphibious autonomous robot,

    G. Dudek, P. Giguere, C. Prahacs, S. Saunderson, J. Sattar, L.-A. Torres- Mendez, M. Jenkin, A. German, A. Hogue, A. Ripsman, et al., “Aqua: An amphibious autonomous robot,” Computer, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 46–53, 2007

    work page 2007

  31. [31]

    Design and exper- iments with loco auv: A low cost open-source autonomous underwater vehicle,

    C. Edge, S. S. Enan, M. Fulton, J. Hong, J. Mo, K. Barthelemy, H. Bashaw, B. Kallevig, C. Knutson, K. Orpen,et al., “Design and exper- iments with loco auv: A low cost open-source autonomous underwater vehicle,” in 2020 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) , pp. 1761–1768, IEEE, 2020

    work page 2020

  32. [32]

    Review of biomimetic underwater robots using smart actuators,

    W.-S. Chu, K.-T. Lee, S.-H. Song, M.-W. Han, J.-Y . Lee, H.-S. Kim, M.-S. Kim, Y .-J. Park, K.-J. Cho, and S.-H. Ahn, “Review of biomimetic underwater robots using smart actuators,” International journal of pre- cision engineering and manufacturing , vol. 13, pp. 1281–1292, 2012

    work page 2012

  33. [33]

    Development and motion control of biomimetic underwater robots: A survey,

    R. Wang, S. Wang, Y . Wang, L. Cheng, and M. Tan, “Development and motion control of biomimetic underwater robots: A survey,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 833–844, 2020

    work page 2020

  34. [34]

    Design and implementation of an auv for petroleum pipeline inspection,

    Y . Tipsuwan and P. Hoonsuwan, “Design and implementation of an auv for petroleum pipeline inspection,” in 2015 7th International Confer- ence on Information Technology and Electrical Engineering (ICITEE) , pp. 382–387, IEEE, 2015

    work page 2015

  35. [35]

    UX- 1 System Design – A Robotic System for Underwater Mining Explo- ration,

    A. Martins, J. Almeida, C. Almeida, A. Dias, N. Dias, J. Aaltonen, A. Heininen, K. T. Koskinen, C. Rossi, S. Dominguez, et al. , “UX- 1 System Design – A Robotic System for Underwater Mining Explo- ration,” in IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pp. 1494–1500, IEEE, 2018

    work page 2018

  36. [36]

    Four flippers or two? tetrapodal swimming with an aquatic robot,

    J. H. Long, J. Schumacher, N. Livingston, and M. Kemp, “Four flippers or two? tetrapodal swimming with an aquatic robot,” Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 20, 2006

    work page 2006

  37. [37]

    Biomimetic underwater robots based on dielectric elastomer actuators,

    J. Shintake, H. Shea, and D. Floreano, “Biomimetic underwater robots based on dielectric elastomer actuators,” in 2016 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) , pp. 4957–4962, Ieee, 2016

    work page 2016

  38. [38]

    Modeling and control of a bio-inspired underwater vessel with undulating-fin propulsion,

    M. I. Uddin and O. M. Curet, “Modeling and control of a bio-inspired underwater vessel with undulating-fin propulsion,” in OCEANS 2018 MTS/IEEE Charleston, pp. 1–7, IEEE, 2018

    work page 2018

  39. [39]

    Eat the invaders: underwater robot vacuum for invasive lionfish,

    iRobot Company, “Eat the invaders: underwater robot vacuum for invasive lionfish,” 2017

    work page 2017

  40. [40]

    Fish-like swimming prototype of mobile underwater robot,

    M. Malec, M. Morawski, and J. Zajac, “Fish-like swimming prototype of mobile underwater robot,” Journal of Automation, Mobile Robotics and Intelligent Systems , pp. 25–30, 2010

    work page 2010

  41. [41]

    Design, fabrication, and swimming performance of a free- swimming tuna-mimetic robot,

    S. F. Masoomi, A. Haunholter, D. Merz, S. Gutschmidt, X. Chen, and M. Sellier, “Design, fabrication, and swimming performance of a free- swimming tuna-mimetic robot,” Journal of Robotics , vol. 2014, no. 1, p. 687985, 2014

    work page 2014

  42. [42]

    Design and development of an autonomous underwater vehicle–robot dolphin,

    Y .-L. Wang, C.-H. Tai, and H.-R. Huang, “Design and development of an autonomous underwater vehicle–robot dolphin,” Journal of Marine Engineering & Technology, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 44–55, 2015

    work page 2015

  43. [43]

    Fabrication of a fish-like underwater robot with flexible plastic film body,

    M. Shibata and N. Sakagami, “Fabrication of a fish-like underwater robot with flexible plastic film body,” Advanced Robotics, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 103–113, 2015

    work page 2015

  44. [44]

    Design principle of a biomimetic underwater robot u- cat,

    T. Salum ¨ae, R. Raag, J. Rebane, A. Ernits, G. Toming, M. Ratas, and M. Kruusmaa, “Design principle of a biomimetic underwater robot u- cat,” in 2014 Oceans-St. John’s, pp. 1–5, IEEE, 2014

    work page 2014

  45. [45]

    A ver- satile jellyfish-like robotic platform for effective underwater propulsion and manipulation,

    T. Wang, H.-J. Joo, S. Song, W. Hu, C. Keplinger, and M. Sitti, “A ver- satile jellyfish-like robotic platform for effective underwater propulsion and manipulation,” Science Advances, vol. 9, no. 15, p. eadg0292, 2023

    work page 2023

  46. [46]

    Nebula: A flexible, solid-state swimming robot enabled by hasel actuators,

    I. Hess and P. Musgrave, “Nebula: A flexible, solid-state swimming robot enabled by hasel actuators,” in Smart Materials, Adaptive Structures and Intelligent Systems, vol. 87523, p. V001T06A004, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2023

    work page 2023

  47. [47]

    Pectoral fin propulsion performance analysis of robotic fish with multiple degrees of freedom based on burst- and-coast swimming behavior stroke ratio,

    Z. Li, B. Li, H. Li, and G. Xia, “Pectoral fin propulsion performance analysis of robotic fish with multiple degrees of freedom based on burst- and-coast swimming behavior stroke ratio,” Biomimetics, vol. 9, 2024

    work page 2024

  48. [48]

    Thrust improvement of a biomimetic robotic fish by using a deformable caudal fin,

    H. Shao, B. Dong, C. Zheng, T. Li, Q. Zuo, Y . Xu, H. Fang, K. He, and F. Xie, “Thrust improvement of a biomimetic robotic fish by using a deformable caudal fin,” Biomimetics, vol. 7, no. 3, p. 113, 2022

    work page 2022

  49. [49]

    Exploration of underwater life with an acoustically controlled soft robotic fish,

    R. K. Katzschmann, J. DelPreto, R. MacCurdy, and D. Rus, “Exploration of underwater life with an acoustically controlled soft robotic fish,” Science Robotics, vol. 3, no. 16, p. eaar3449, 2018

    work page 2018

  50. [50]

    Williamson, MIT SoFi: A Study in Fabrication, Target Tracking, and Control of Soft Robotic Fish

    R. Williamson, MIT SoFi: A Study in Fabrication, Target Tracking, and Control of Soft Robotic Fish . PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2022

    work page 2022

  51. [51]

    Development of a two-joint robotic fish for real-world exploration,

    J. Liang, T. Wang, and L. Wen, “Development of a two-joint robotic fish for real-world exploration,” Journal of Field Robotics , vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 70–79, 2011

    work page 2011

  52. [52]

    Experiment of robofish aided underwater archaeology,

    L. Jian-hong, W. Tian-miao, W. Song, Z. Dan, and S. Jian, “Experiment of robofish aided underwater archaeology,” in IEEE Int. Conf. Rob. Biomimetics, vol. 18, pp. 98–121, 2005

    work page 2005

  53. [53]

    Miniaturized swimming soft robot with complex movement actuated and controlled by remote light signals,

    C. Huang, J.-a. Lv, X. Tian, Y . Wang, Y . Yu, and J. Liu, “Miniaturized swimming soft robot with complex movement actuated and controlled by remote light signals,” Scientific reports, vol. 5, no. 1, p. 17414, 2015

    work page 2015

  54. [54]

    Underwater undulating propulsion biomimetic robots: A review,

    G. Li, G. Liu, D. Leng, X. Fang, G. Li, and W. Wang, “Underwater undulating propulsion biomimetic robots: A review,”Biomimetics, vol. 8, no. 3, p. 318, 2023

    work page 2023

  55. [55]

    Tunable stiffness enables fast and efficient swimming in fish-like robots,

    Q. Zhong, J. Zhu, F. E. Fish, S. J. Kerr, A. Downs, H. Bart-Smith, and D. Quinn, “Tunable stiffness enables fast and efficient swimming in fish-like robots,” Science Robotics, vol. 6, no. 57, p. eabe4088, 2021

    work page 2021

  56. [56]

    Openfish: Biomimetic design of a soft robotic fish for high speed locomotion,

    S. C. Van Den Berg, R. B. Scharff, Z. Rus ´ak, and J. Wu, “Openfish: Biomimetic design of a soft robotic fish for high speed locomotion,” HardwareX, vol. 12, p. e00320, 2022

    work page 2022

  57. [57]

    Bio-inspired design of an underwater robot exploiting fin undulation propulsion,

    G. Bianchi, S. Cinquemani, and F. Resta, “Bio-inspired design of an underwater robot exploiting fin undulation propulsion,” Applied Sciences, vol. 11, no. 6, p. 2556, 2021

    work page 2021

  58. [58]

    Implicit coordination for 3d underwater collective behaviors in a fish-inspired robot swarm,

    F. Berlinger, M. Gauci, and R. Nagpal, “Implicit coordination for 3d underwater collective behaviors in a fish-inspired robot swarm,” Science Robotics, vol. 6, no. 50, p. eabd8668, 2021

    work page 2021

  59. [59]

    Design and experimental evaluation of the novel undulatory propulsors for biomimetic underwater robots,

    Y . Li, L. Chen, Y . Wang, and C. Ren, “Design and experimental evaluation of the novel undulatory propulsors for biomimetic underwater robots,” Bioinspiration & Biomimetics , vol. 16, no. 5, p. 056005, 2021

    work page 2021

  60. [60]

    An unteth- ered brittle star robot for closed-loop underwater locomotion,

    Z. J. Patterson, A. P. Sabelhaus, K. Chin, and C. Majidi, “An unteth- ered brittle star robot for closed-loop underwater locomotion,” CoRR, abs/2003.13529, 2020

    work page arXiv 2003

  61. [61]

    SUA VE: A Self-Adaptive Underwater Vehicle for Fault-Tolerant Mission Execution,

    T. Rezende Silva et al., “SUA VE: A Self-Adaptive Underwater Vehicle for Fault-Tolerant Mission Execution,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.09220, 2023

    work page arXiv 2023

  62. [63]

    A goa-based fault-tolerant trajectory tracking control for an underwater vehicle of multi-thruster system without actuator saturation,

    D. Zhu, L. Wang, H. Zhang, and S. X. Yang, “A goa-based fault-tolerant trajectory tracking control for an underwater vehicle of multi-thruster system without actuator saturation,” IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering , vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 771–782, 2023

    work page 2023

  63. [64]

    Comparative performance investigations of differ- ent thruster configurations under current loads,

    K. Koshkin et al. , “Comparative performance investigations of differ- ent thruster configurations under current loads,” Ocean Engineering , vol. 288, p. 16147, 2023

    work page 2023

  64. [65]

    Design, modeling, con- trol, and experiments for multiple auvs formation,

    C. Wang, W. Cai, J. Lu, X. Ding, and J. Yang, “Design, modeling, con- trol, and experiments for multiple auvs formation,” IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering , vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 2776–2787, 2021

    work page 2021

  65. [66]

    Introduction of INR18650-30Q

    S. E. B. Division, “Introduction of INR18650-30Q .” https://bluerobotics. com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/INR18650-30Q-Data-Sheet.pdf? x70095, 2014. Accessed: 04-18-2025

    work page 2018

  66. [67]

    Automatic generation and detection of highly reliable fiducial markers under occlusion,

    S. Garrido-Jurado, R. Mu ˜noz-Salinas, F. J. Madrid-Cuevas, and M. J. Mar´ın-Jim´enez, “Automatic generation and detection of highly reliable fiducial markers under occlusion,” Pattern Recognition, vol. 47, no. 6, pp. 2280–2292, 2014

    work page 2014

  67. [68]

    Necessity of hydrostatic stability in autonomous underwater vehicles on intervention missions,

    T. Rossol, C. E. S. Koch, R. Bachmayer, and F. Kirchner, “Necessity of hydrostatic stability in autonomous underwater vehicles on intervention missions,” in OCEANS 2022, Hampton Roads , pp. 1–10, 2022

    work page 2022

  68. [69]

    Stability of a bottom-heavy underwater vehicle,

    N. E. Leonard, “Stability of a bottom-heavy underwater vehicle,” Auto- matica, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 331–346, 1997

    work page 1997

  69. [70]

    Thrust allocation control of an underwater vehicle with a redundant thruster configuration,

    H. Deng and J. Tao, “Thrust allocation control of an underwater vehicle with a redundant thruster configuration,” Mathematics, vol. 13, no. 11, p. 1766, 2025

    work page 2025

  70. [71]

    Morpheus: An a-sized auv with morphing fins and algorithms for agile maneuver- ing,

    S. Randeni, M. Sacarny, M. Benjamin, and M. Triantafyllou, “Morpheus: An a-sized auv with morphing fins and algorithms for agile maneuver- ing,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.11692 , 2022

    work page arXiv 2022

  71. [72]

    Underwater acoustic communication channels: Propagation models and statistical characterization,

    M. Stojanovic and J. Preisig, “Underwater acoustic communication channels: Propagation models and statistical characterization,” IEEE communications magazine, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 84–89, 2009

    work page 2009

  72. [73]

    Marlin-q: Multi- modal communications for reliable and low-latency underwater data delivery,

    S. Basagni, V . Di Valerio, P. Gjanci, and C. Petrioli, “Marlin-q: Multi- modal communications for reliable and low-latency underwater data delivery,”Ad Hoc Networks , vol. 82, pp. 134–145, 2019

    work page 2019

  73. [74]

    Lin and D

    S. Lin and D. J. Costello, Error control coding , vol. 2. Prentice hall Scarborough, 2001

    work page 2001

  74. [75]

    Propagation and scattering effects in underwater acoustic communication channels,

    P. A. Van Walree, “Propagation and scattering effects in underwater acoustic communication channels,” IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineer- ing, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 614–631, 2013

    work page 2013

  75. [76]

    Lanzagorta, Underwater communications

    M. Lanzagorta, Underwater communications . Morgan & Claypool Publishers, 2012

    work page 2012

  76. [77]

    Cyclic decoding procedures for bose-chaudhuri- hocquenghem codes,

    R. Chien, “Cyclic decoding procedures for bose-chaudhuri- hocquenghem codes,” IEEE Transactions on information theory , vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 357–363, 2003

    work page 2003

  77. [78]

    Shift-register synthesis and bch decoding,

    J. Massey, “Shift-register synthesis and bch decoding,” IEEE transac- tions on Information Theory , vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 122–127, 2003

    work page 2003

  78. [79]

    Orb-slam3: An accurate open-source library for visual, visual– inertial, and multimap slam,

    C. Campos, R. Elvira, J. J. G. Rodr ´ıguez, J. M. Montiel, and J. D. Tard´os, “Orb-slam3: An accurate open-source library for visual, visual– inertial, and multimap slam,” IEEE transactions on robotics , vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 1874–1890, 2021

    work page 2021