pith. sign in

arxiv: 2512.23619 · v2 · submitted 2025-12-29 · 💻 cs.RO · math.GT· math.OC

The N-5 Scaling Law: Topological Dimensionality Reduction in the Optimal Design of Fully-actuated Multirotors

Antonio Franchi This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 19:09 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.RO math.GTmath.OC
keywords N-5 scaling lawmultirotor designtopological optimizationphase transitionstar polygonsfully-actuated vehiclesisotropy metricconfiguration manifold
0
0 comments X

The pith

Optimal rotor orientations on regular multirotor chassis reduce to exactly N-5 disconnected one-dimensional curves.

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

The paper reframes multirotor geometric design as a search over the topology of the configuration space rather than a search for isolated points. By placing rotor lines of action on the product manifold of projective lines and minimizing a coordinate-free log-volume isotropy cost, the authors show that chassis symmetry triggers a phase transition: the discrete set of optima collapses first onto an N-torus of tangent lines and then onto a union of continuous curves. These curves are indexed by admissible star polygons, yielding the N-5 Scaling Law that holds for all examined regular polygons and Platonic solids with N at most 10. A reader should care because the law reveals an intrinsic design redundancy that lets the vehicle slide continuously between equivalent optima while preserving full actuation and isotropic authority.

Core claim

For generic irregular chassis the optimal solutions appear as isolated points on the product manifold. As vertex symmetry approaches that of regular planar polygons or Platonic solids, the landscape undergoes a critical transition in which the solution set collapses onto an N-dimensional torus of lines tangent to the circumscribing sphere and subsequently reduces, via affine phase locking, to precisely N-5 disconnected one-dimensional branches. These branches are in one-to-one correspondence with the admissible star polygons {N/q}, which furnish an exact algebraic prediction of the optimal rotor phases for any N.

What carries the argument

Affine phase locking on the N-dimensional torus of tangent lines, which enforces the collapse of the optimal set to K = N-5 disconnected 1D branches indexed by star-polygon sequences.

If this is right

  • A vehicle can continuously reconfigure its rotor angles along any of the N-5 branches without loss of isotropic control authority.
  • Optimal phases for arbitrary N are exactly predictable from the admissible star-polygon sequence {N/q}.
  • The design space contains continuous families of equivalent optima rather than isolated points, once chassis regularity is reached.
  • For irregular chassis the optima remain discrete, so the continuous redundancy appears only after the symmetry threshold is crossed.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the N-5 law persists for larger N, designers could exploit the extra degrees of freedom to trade secondary objectives such as energy or fault tolerance while remaining at the isotropy optimum.
  • The same symmetry-induced reduction may appear in other actuator-placement problems on regular polyhedra, for example in sensor arrays or parallel mechanisms.
  • Real-time morphing along the branches could be implemented as a low-dimensional controller that responds to rotor failure or payload change without recomputing a full optimization.

Load-bearing premise

The log-volume isotropy metric on the product of projective lines fully encodes the relevant performance landscape and the N-5 count continues to hold for all regular geometries.

What would settle it

Observation of a regular Platonic solid or polygon with N greater than 10 whose optimal set contains a number of connected components other than N-5, or whose continuous branches fail to preserve the isotropy value while traversing the curve.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.23619 by Antonio Franchi.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Geometric construction of the RP 2 Disc Model. (Left) A 3D view of the upper hemisphere of S 2 and the equatorial disc. A rotor’s line of action (dashed line) passes through the origin, intersects the hemisphere at a red dot, and projects orthographically to a blue square on the disc. (Right) The resulting 2D disc representation. Topological Loops: We also visualize a full rotation of a line about a fixed … view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Visual dictionary of representative chassis. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The disc dashboard view of M = (RP 2 ) N : a graphical model of the manifold of all force directions for two representative chassis. Configuration spaces for a regular hexagon (Top-Left) and an octahedron (Top-Right), where N = 6. Each chassis vertex is equipped with a local copy of the RP 2 disc model defined in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Stochastic initialization of the search space for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: presents three representative cases selected from the broader dataset. Visual inspection reveals a stark contrast in solution topology driven by these mathematical properties. While κ-minimization (orange) results in unstructured, scattered point clouds due to gradient instability, the proposed Log-Volume method (blue) consistently converges to distinct, coherent sets of solutions. The topological structur… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Global solution landscapes for irregular and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Type IV: Global solution landscapes for symmetric chassis categorized by the nature of their manifold collapse. The results demonstrate that for symmetric geometries, the optimizer converges toward the Tangent Torus CT N ⊥ , but the quality of this collapse varies. Near-regular geometries (CQCub8, CCubOct12, CHexPr12) exhibit an imperfect collapse: for the Quasi-Cube (CQCub8), the solutions form thin lines… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Representation of the solution landscape data points (M∗ points) in M for the chassis: Octahedron (N = 6). The gray dots represent the two coordinates of these points on each disc RP 2 i . The data is perfectly fitted by the red semi-ellipses, whose parameters (rotation and elevation) are shown in each subplot. The parameters recovered by the fit reveal that the combination of all semi-elliptical curves co… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Linear coordination patterns in the intrinsic angular space. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Visual results of the topological branch and phase extraction of the landscape of optimal solutions. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Star Polygons {N/q} which are admissible according to the N − 5 Law. A grid visualization of star polygons for N ∈ [6, 10] and q ∈ [3, N − 3]. Each subplot represents a specific geometry where the red arrow indicates the initial phase step (∆ϕ) corresponding to the “chord” length of the polygon. Each star polygon denoted by {N, q} in this figure maps to one of the branches of the N-vertex polygonal chassi… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Representation of the solution landscape data points (M∗ points) in M for the chassis: Icosahedron (N = 12). The gray dots represent the two coordinates of these points on each disc RP 2 i . The data is perfectly fitted by the red semi-ellipses, whose parameters (rotation and elevation are shown in each subplot). The combination of all the semi-elliptical curves matches exactly the CT N ⊥ of the Icosahedr… view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Representation of the solution landscape data points (M∗ points) in M for the chassis: Dodecahedron (N = 20). The gray dots represent the two coordinates of these points on each disc RP 2 i . The data is perfectly fitted by the red semi-ellipses, whose parameters (rotation and elevation are shown in each subplot). The combination of all the semi-elliptical curves matches exactly the CT N ⊥ of the Dodecahe… view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Representation of the solution landscape data points (M∗ points) in M for the chassis: Hexagon (N = 6). The gray dots represent the two coordinates of these points on each disc RP 2 i . The data is perfectly fitted by the red semi-ellipses, whose parameters (rotation and elevation) are shown in each subplot. The parameters recovered by the fit reveal that the combination of all semi-elliptical curves corr… view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Representation of the solution landscape data points (M∗ points) in M for the chassis: Heptagon (N = 7). The gray dots represent the two coordinates of these points on each disc RP 2 i . The data is perfectly fitted by the red semi-ellipses, whose parameters (rotation and elevation are shown in each subplot). The combination of all the semi-elliptical curves matches exactly the CT N ⊥ of the Heptagon (N =… view at source ↗
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Representation of the solution landscape data points (M∗ points) in M for the chassis: Decagon (N = 10). The gray dots represent the two coordinates of these points on each disc RP 2 i . The data is perfectly fitted by the red semi-ellipses, whose parameters (rotation and elevation are shown in each subplot). The combination of all the semi-elliptical curves matches exactly the CT N ⊥ of the Decagon (N = … view at source ↗
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: A partial summary fo the 1D-Manifold extraction results): Top row: Selection of fitted pairwise angular correlations. Each subplot shows a representative projection of the solution manifold for a specific regular chassis. The data points are overlaid with the fitted affine phase-locking curves, colored to distinguish the distinct K topological branches (isomers) identified by the algorithm. Bottom row: To… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The geometric design of fully-actuated and omnidirectional N-rotor aerial vehicles is conventionally formulated as a parametric optimization problem, seeking a single optimal set of N orientations within a fixed architectural family. This work departs from that paradigm to investigate the intrinsic topological structure of the optimization landscape itself. We formulate the design problem on the product manifold of Projective Lines \RP^2^N, fixing the rotor positions to the vertices of polyhedral chassis while varying their lines of action. By minimizing a coordinate-invariant Log-Volume isotropy metric, we reveal that the topology of the global optima is governed strictly by the symmetry of the chassis. For generic (irregular) vertex arrangements, the solutions appear as a discrete set of isolated points. However, as the chassis geometry approaches regularity, the solution space undergoes a critical phase transition, collapsing onto an N-dimensional Torus of the lines tangent at the vertexes to the circumscribing sphere of the chassis, and subsequently reducing to continuous 1-dimensional curves driven by Affine Phase Locking. We synthesize these observations into the N-5 Scaling Law: an empirical relationship holding for all examined regular planar polygons and Platonic solids (N <= 10), where the space of optimal configurations consists of K=N-5 disconnected 1D topological branches. We demonstrate that these locking patterns correspond to a sequence of admissible Star Polygons {N/q}, allowing for the exact prediction of optimal phases for arbitrary N. Crucially, this topology reveals a design redundancy that enables optimality-preserving morphing: the vehicle can continuously reconfigure along these branches while preserving optimal isotropic control authority.

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

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper claims that the optimization landscape for fully-actuated multirotor designs on regular polyhedral chassis, formulated on the product manifold (RP^2)^N and minimized via a coordinate-invariant Log-Volume isotropy metric, undergoes a symmetry-driven phase transition: from isolated points for irregular chassis, to an N-torus of tangent lines, and then to exactly K=N-5 disconnected 1D branches via Affine Phase Locking. This N-5 Scaling Law is reported as empirical for regular planar polygons and Platonic solids with N<=10, with branches corresponding to admissible star polygons {N/q} that enable prediction for arbitrary N and optimality-preserving continuous morphing.

Significance. If the observed topology and exact N-5 branch count generalize, the result would establish a fundamental redundancy in the design space of omnidirectional multirotors, directly enabling reconfigurable vehicles that maintain isotropic control authority along continuous paths. This could provide a topological foundation for symmetry exploitation in aerial robotics, moving beyond single-point optimization to families of equivalent optima.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and the section synthesizing the N-5 Scaling Law: the claim that the space consists of exactly K=N-5 disconnected 1D branches is presented as an empirical relationship for N<=10, but no derivation or first-principles argument is given showing why Affine Phase Locking must produce precisely this count (i.e., effective codimension 4) for arbitrary N or why it is independent of the Log-Volume metric.
  2. [The section on phase transition and Affine Phase Locking] The description of the phase transition from N-torus to 1D curves: the reduction is tied to the specific isotropy metric and symmetry assumptions on regular chassis, yet the manuscript provides no verification that the topology persists under alternative coordinate-invariant measures or for N>10, leaving the general validity of the scaling law unsupported.
  3. [The section on star polygons and phase prediction] The part linking branches to star polygons {N/q}: while this allows prediction of phases, the correspondence is observational without an analytical demonstration that the locking mechanism always yields N-5 components independent of the chosen metric or manifold formulation.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states the law holds for 'all examined' cases with N<=10 but does not list the specific N values, number of trials, or quantitative measures (e.g., branch counts or fitting errors) used to identify the topologies.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for the thorough and constructive review. We address each major comment below. The N-5 Scaling Law is presented as an empirical observation from numerical experiments on regular chassis for N≤10; we will revise the manuscript to emphasize this limitation more clearly and to add supporting experiments where feasible. We provide point-by-point responses and indicate revisions accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and the section synthesizing the N-5 Scaling Law: the claim that the space consists of exactly K=N-5 disconnected 1D branches is presented as an empirical relationship for N<=10, but no derivation or first-principles argument is given showing why Affine Phase Locking must produce precisely this count (i.e., effective codimension 4) for arbitrary N or why it is independent of the Log-Volume metric.

    Authors: We agree that no first-principles derivation is provided for the exact N-5 count. The manuscript explicitly frames the scaling law as an empirical relationship observed across regular planar polygons and Platonic solids with N≤10. The codimension reduction arises from the combination of rotational symmetry constraints on the regular chassis and the Affine Phase Locking mechanism identified in our optimizations. We will revise the abstract and the synthesizing section to state explicitly that the N-5 count is empirical, to clarify that independence from the specific Log-Volume metric has not been proven analytically, and to discuss the observed effective codimension in terms of symmetry-induced constraints rather than claiming metric independence. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [The section on phase transition and Affine Phase Locking] The description of the phase transition from N-torus to 1D curves: the reduction is tied to the specific isotropy metric and symmetry assumptions on regular chassis, yet the manuscript provides no verification that the topology persists under alternative coordinate-invariant measures or for N>10, leaving the general validity of the scaling law unsupported.

    Authors: We acknowledge this limitation. The phase transition and reduction to 1D curves are demonstrated numerically for the Log-Volume isotropy metric on regular chassis with N≤10. We will add a new paragraph in the phase transition section reporting additional numerical checks using an alternative coordinate-invariant measure (e.g., the condition number of the allocation matrix) for N=6 and N=8 to test persistence of the topology. We will also explicitly note that verification for N>10 and general metric independence remains an open question for future work, thereby qualifying the general validity of the scaling law. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [The section on star polygons and phase prediction] The part linking branches to star polygons {N/q}: while this allows prediction of phases, the correspondence is observational without an analytical demonstration that the locking mechanism always yields N-5 components independent of the chosen metric or manifold formulation.

    Authors: The correspondence between optimal branches and admissible star polygons {N/q} is observational, obtained by matching the computed phase patterns to the winding numbers of star polygons that satisfy the symmetry constraints of the regular chassis. We do not claim an analytical proof that the locking mechanism invariably produces exactly N-5 components for arbitrary metrics or manifold formulations. We will revise the star polygons section to describe the link as a predictive heuristic validated on the tested cases, to state that the exact branch count may depend on the metric and symmetry assumptions, and to limit the predictive claim to the scope of our formulation and numerical evidence. revision: partial

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • Absence of a first-principles derivation showing why Affine Phase Locking produces precisely N-5 branches for arbitrary N independent of the isotropy metric.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

N-5 Scaling Law presented strictly as empirical observation for N≤10; no derivation reduces to inputs by construction

full rationale

The paper explicitly labels the N-5 Scaling Law as an empirical relationship observed across examined regular polygons and Platonic solids with N≤10. The topology reduction from the product manifold RP^{2N} to K=N-5 disconnected 1D branches is described as a numerical observation under the chosen Log-Volume isotropy metric, with no first-principles derivation or uniqueness theorem invoked that would force the exact branch count independently of the metric or the examined cases. No self-citations appear in the provided text as load-bearing for the central claim, and the star-polygon prediction for arbitrary N is presented as an extension of the same empirical patterns rather than a closed-form reduction. The derivation chain therefore remains self-contained against external benchmarks and does not collapse any prediction to its inputs by definition or fitting.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the manifold model of rotor lines of action, the choice of Log-Volume isotropy metric, and the empirical observation of the scaling law for regular geometries up to N=10; no independent verification of the metric or generalization proof is provided.

free parameters (1)
  • Log-Volume isotropy metric
    The specific functional form of the coordinate-invariant isotropy measure used to define optimality is introduced without derivation from first principles and may contain implicit parameters that shape the observed topology.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The design space is faithfully represented by the product manifold of projective lines RP^2^N with fixed vertex positions
    Invoked when the optimization landscape topology is analyzed solely by varying lines of action on this manifold.
  • ad hoc to paper Regular chassis symmetry induces a phase transition from isolated points to N-dimensional tori and then to 1D curves
    Central to the reported collapse onto continuous branches and the N-5 count.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5595 in / 1607 out tokens · 69605 ms · 2026-05-16T19:09:29.878346+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

37 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems 110(21)

    Aboudorra Y, Gabellieri C, Brantjes R, Sablé Q and Franchi A (2024) Modelling, analysis, and control of omnimorph: an omnidirectional morphing multi-rotor uav. Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems 110(21)

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    In: 16th International Micro Air Vehicle Conference and Competition (IMAV), IMAV2025-13

    Al-zubaidi S and Stol KA (2025) A comparison of optimised, fixed-tilt, fully-actuated multirotor uav configurations. In: 16th International Micro Air Vehicle Conference and Competition (IMAV), IMAV2025-13

    work page 2025

  3. [3]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.04724

    Arza E, Rehberg W, Weiss P, Kulkarni M and Alexis K (2025) Performance-guided task-specific optimization for multirotor design. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.04724

    work page arXiv 2025

  4. [4]

    Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics

    Bodie K, Brunner M and Allenspach M (2024) Omnidirectional Tilt-Rotor Flying Robots for Aerial Physical Interaction: Modelling, Control, Design and Experiments, volume 157. Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    In: 2016 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA)

    Brescianini D and D'Andrea R (2016) Design, modeling and control of an omni-directional aerial vehicle. In: 2016 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). pp. 3261--3266. doi:10.1109/ICRA.2016.7487497

    work page doi:10.1109/icra.2016.7487497 2016

  6. [6]

    Mechatronics 55: 76--93

    Brescianini D and D'Andrea R (2018) An omni-directional multirotor vehicle. Mechatronics 55: 76--93

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    Varadarajan, A

    Brunner M, Giacomini L, Siegwart R and Tognon M (2022) Energy tank-based policies for robust aerial physical interaction with moving objects. In: 2022 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). pp. 2054--2060. doi:10.1109/ICRA46639.2022.9812342

    work page doi:10.1109/icra46639.2022.9812342 2022

  8. [8]

    3rd edition

    Coxeter HSM (1973) Regular Polytopes. 3rd edition. New York: Dover Publications. ISBN 978-0486614809

    work page 1973

  9. [9]

    In: Aerial Robotic Manipulation, Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics, volume 129

    Franchi A (2019) Interaction control of platforms with multi-directional total thrust. In: Aerial Robotic Manipulation, Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics, volume 129. Springer, pp. 175--189

    work page 2019

  10. [10]

    In: 2024 10th International Conference on Automation, Robotics and Applications (ICARA)

    Hamandi M, Ali AM, Evangeliou N, Chaikalis D, Tzes A, Kyriakopoulos K and Khorrami F (2024) Mechatronic design of an omnidirectional octorotor uav. In: 2024 10th International Conference on Automation, Robotics and Applications (ICARA). pp. 300--304

    work page 2024

  11. [11]

    The International Journal of Robotics Research40(8-9), 1015–1044 (2021)

    Hamandi M, Usai F, Sable Q, Staub N, Tognon M and Franchi A (2021) Design of multirotor aerial vehicles: a taxonomy based on input allocation. The International Journal of Robotics Research (IJRR) 40(8-9): 1015--1044. doi:10.1177/02783649211025998

    work page doi:10.1177/02783649211025998 2021

  12. [12]

    In: 2013 IEEE International Symposium on Safety, Security, and Rescue Robotics (SSRR)

    Jiang G and Voyles R (2013) Hexrotor UAV platform enabling dextrous interaction with structures-flight test. In: 2013 IEEE International Symposium on Safety, Security, and Rescue Robotics (SSRR). pp. 1--6. doi:10.1109/SSRR.2013.6719377

    work page doi:10.1109/ssrr.2013.6719377 2013

  13. [13]

    IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine 25(4): 34--44

    Kamel M, Verling S, Elkhatib O, Sprecher C, Wulkop P, Taylor Z, Siegwart R and Gilitschenski I (2018) The voliro omniorientational hexacopter: An agile and maneuverable tiltable-rotor aerial vehicle. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine 25(4): 34--44. doi:10.1109/MRA.2018.2866758

    work page doi:10.1109/mra.2018.2866758 2018

  14. [14]

    IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters 10(2): 1130--1137

    Lee H, Cheng S, Wu Z, Lim J, Siegwart R and Hovakimyan N (2025) Geometric tracking control of omnidirectional multirotors for aggressive maneuvers. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters 10(2): 1130--1137. doi:10.1109/LRA.2024.3518922

    work page doi:10.1109/lra.2024.3518922 2025

  15. [15]

    In: 2017 IEEE 3rd International Symposium in Robotics and Manufacturing Automation (ROMA)

    Lei Y, Ji Y, Wang C, Bai Y and Xu Z (2017) Aerodynamic design on the non-planar rotor system of a multi-rotor flying robot ( MFR ). In: 2017 IEEE 3rd International Symposium in Robotics and Manufacturing Automation (ROMA). pp. 1--5. doi:10.1109/ROMA.2017.8231740

    work page doi:10.1109/roma.2017.8231740 2017

  16. [16]

    Acta Numerica 5: 149--190

    Lewis AS and Overton ML (1996) Eigenvalue optimization. Acta Numerica 5: 149--190

    work page 1996

  17. [17]

    In: AIAA SciTech Forum, AIAA 2024-0508

    McCarthy RM, Thomas T, Danielson C, Phillips S and Fierro R (2024) Control for an omnidirectional multi-rotor uav for space applications. In: AIAA SciTech Forum, AIAA 2024-0508

    work page 2024

  18. [18]

    ://betaflight.com/docs/development/DShot

    Niessen F and Betaflight Dev Team (2024) Digital shot ( DShot ) ESC protocol: Bidirectional telemetry standards. ://betaflight.com/docs/development/DShot. Industry standard for real-time motor feedback

    work page 2024

  19. [19]

    Applied Sciences 11(22): 10991

    Nigro M, Pierri F and Caccavale F (2021) Control of an omnidirectional uav for transportation and manipulation tasks. Applied Sciences 11(22): 10991. doi:10.3390/app112210991

    work page doi:10.3390/app112210991 2021

  20. [20]

    Master's Thesis, University of Twente

    Nikitas D (2024) Optimized design of a tilted propeller aerial robot for ballast tank contact inspections. Master's Thesis, University of Twente

    work page 2024

  21. [21]

    In: 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA)

    Nikou A, Gavridis GC and Kyriakopoulos KJ (2015) Mechanical design, modelling and control of a novel aerial manipulator. In: 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). pp. 4698--4703. doi:10.1109/ICRA.2015.7139851

    work page doi:10.1109/icra.2015.7139851 2015

  22. [22]

    Second edition

    Nocedal J and Wright SJ (2006) Numerical optimization. Second edition. Springer

    work page 2006

  23. [23]

    IEEE Transactions on Robotics 38(1): 626--645

    Ollero A, Tognon M, Suarez A, Lee D and Franchi A (2022) Past, present, and future of aerial robotic manipulators. IEEE Transactions on Robotics 38(1): 626--645. doi:10.1109/TRO.2021.3084395

    work page doi:10.1109/tro.2021.3084395 2022

  24. [24]

    In: 2016 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS)

    Park S, Her J, Kim J and Lee D (2016) Design, modeling and control of omni-directional aerial robot. In: 2016 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). pp. 1570--1575. doi:10.1109/IROS.2016.7759254

    work page doi:10.1109/iros.2016.7759254 2016

  25. [25]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA)

    Rajappa S, Ryll M, B\"ulthoff HH and Franchi A (2015) Modeling, control and design optimization for a fully-actuated hexarotor aerial vehicle with tilted propellers. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). pp. 4006--4013. doi:10.1109/ICRA.2015.7139759

    work page doi:10.1109/icra.2015.7139759 2015

  26. [26]

    IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine 27(3): 97--107

    Rashad R, Goerres J, Aarts R, Engelen JBC and Stramigioli S (2020) Fully actuated multirotor UAV s: A literature review. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine 27(3): 97--107. doi:10.1109/MRA.2019.2955964

    work page doi:10.1109/mra.2019.2955964 2020

  27. [27]

    IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology 23(2): 540--556

    Ryll M, B\"ulthoff HH and Giordano PR (2015) A novel overactuated quadrotor unmanned aerial vehicle: Modeling, control, and experimental validation. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology 23(2): 540--556

    work page 2015

  28. [28]

    The International Journal of Robotics Research 38(9): 1045--1062

    Ryll M, Muscio G, Pierri F, Cataldi E, Antonelli G, Caccavale F, Bicego D and Franchi A (2019) 6d interaction control with aerial robots: The flying end-effector paradigm. The International Journal of Robotics Research 38(9): 1045--1062. doi:10.1177/0278364919856694

    work page doi:10.1177/0278364919856694 2019

  29. [29]

    ://github.com/bitdump/BLHeli

    Skaug S (2024) BLHeli\_32 firmware for 32-bit electronic speed controllers. ://github.com/bitdump/BLHeli. Widespread firmware for high-performance multirotor ESCs

    work page 2024

  30. [30]

    In: 2022 IEEE 5th International Conference on Soft Robotics (RoboSoft)

    Szász R, Allenspach M, Han M, Tognon M and Katzschmann RK (2022) Modeling and control of an omnidirectional micro aerial vehicle equipped with a soft robotic arm. In: 2022 IEEE 5th International Conference on Soft Robotics (RoboSoft). pp. 01--08

    work page 2022

  31. [31]

    IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters (RA-L) 3(3): 2277--2282

    Tognon M and Franchi A (2018) Omnidirectional aerial vehicles with unidirectional thrusters: Theory, optimal design, and control. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters (RA-L) 3(3): 2277--2282. doi:10.1109/LRA.2018.2802544

    work page doi:10.1109/lra.2018.2802544 2018

  32. [32]

    In: Proceedings of the 28th Congress of the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences (ICAS)

    Toratani D (2012) Research and development of doublet tetrahedron hexa-rotorcraft ( DOT-HR ). In: Proceedings of the 28th Congress of the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences (ICAS). Brisbane, Australia

    work page 2012

  33. [33]

    Transactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering 42(1)

    von Frankenberg F and Nokleby SB (2018) Inclined landing testing of an omni-directional unmanned aerial vehicle. Transactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering 42(1). doi:10.1139/tcsme-2017-0008

    work page doi:10.1139/tcsme-2017-0008 2018

  34. [34]

    u ksel B, Secchi C, B \

    Y \"u ksel B, Secchi C, B \"u lthoff HH and Franchi A (2019) Aerial physical interaction via IDA-PBC . The International Journal of Robotics Research 38(4): 403--421. doi:10.1177/0278364919835605

    work page doi:10.1177/0278364919835605 2019

  35. [35]

    IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering 22: 3528--3542

    Zhong H, Liang J, Chen Y, Zhang H, Mao J and Wang Y (2025) Prototype, modeling, and control of aerial robots with physical interaction: A review. IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering 22: 3528--3542

    work page 2025

  36. [36]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eid howpublished institution isbn journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type url volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.all := #1 'mid...

    work page

  37. [37]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in bbl.in capitalize ":" * " " *...

    work page