Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 86 references

A quadrotor with four two-axis-gimballed rotor systems can vector full thrust in any direction, stay stable through essentially every attitude, and keep a compact airframe — shown in multi-revolution rotation, wrist-level manipulation, and

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 08:57 UTC pith:W7GMTXKD

load-bearing objection MorphQuad is a credible first hardware integration of full thrust vectoring with onboard autonomy, but the stability claim overreaches the proof and the experiments lack ground truth — still worth refereeing. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.02764 v4 pith:W7GMTXKD submitted 2026-07-02 cs.RO

MorphQuad: Morphable Quadrotor for Superhuman Maneuverability, Manipulation, and Resiliency

Jose Diaz Peon Gonzalez Pacheco , Jiawei Xu , Andrew Zhao , Hongyu Zhou , Atharva Navsalkar , Andrew Scheffer , Amrith Malli Reddi , Sashreek Shankar
show 2 more authors
Yuqing Bao Vasileios Tzoumas
This is my paper
classification cs.RO
keywords omnidirectional flightthrust vectoringtwo-axis gimbalcontrol allocationgimbal lockdownwash avoidanceaerial manipulationresilient flight
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

MorphQuad sets out to prove that one small planar quadrotor need not trade off the three capabilities that have historically been in conflict: pointing maximum thrust in any direction, staying provably stable through almost every attitude, and keeping the compact structure of a standard quadrotor. The route is hardware and control co-design: each rotor is a coaxial counter-rotating pair carried on a two-axis gimbal, and the controller treats the four thrust vectors as twelve inputs mapped to the six-degree-of-freedom wrench by a constant full-rank matrix. The allocation uses the matrix's null space to steer rotors away from gimbal lock and inter-rotor downwash without changing the commanded force and torque. If correct, one vehicle can inspect pipes while rotating continuously, turn valves and press nails with human-wrist-level strength, and reject winds and pushes from arbitrary directions using only onboard sensing.

Core claim

The paper claims that a two-axis gimbal under each of four rotors, with each rotor a coaxial counter-rotating pair, lets a quadrotor vector full thrust in any direction, stay free of gimbal lock and downwash-induced wrench errors, and keep a compact planar frame. The control uses a geometric controller on SE(3) and a minimum-norm thrust allocation corrected through the null space of the constant 6x12 input matrix, so rotor thrusts can be redistributed without changing the commanded wrench. This yields almost-everywhere exponential stability and, in flight, 720-degree continuous rotation, 4.92 Nm valve-turning torque, nail pressing, object pushing, and hover in 30 m/s wind aimed at a single r

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the constant 6x12 input matrix M that maps the twelve components of the four rotor-thrust vectors to the vehicle's force and torque. Because M has full row rank, every wrench is reachable; because it is wide, its six-dimensional null space lets the allocator change the thrust distribution at a fixed wrench. The null-space correction is steered by the current desired force direction: it adds a component proportional to the force direction's projection on the body j-axis to move inner servos off beta = ±90 degrees, and a conditional component to prevent adjacent rotor pairs from pointing their downwash into each other. The coaxial counter-rotating pair is the hardwar

Load-bearing premise

The whole argument leans on the assumption that each counter-rotating rotor pair produces exactly the commanded thrust along the gimbal direction with no residual parasitic torque, and that the null-space correction prevents inter-rotor downwash in every regime where the platform flies; if either fails, the delivered wrench differs from the commanded wrench and the exponential-stability theorem no longer applies.

What would settle it

Mount a six-axis force/torque sensor between the airframe and a fixed stand, command the corrected thrust allocation through a 90-degree-roll hover with alternating small lateral force setpoints, and compare commanded to measured wrench near the beta = ±90-degree and downwash-aligned trajectories; a discrepancy beyond sensor noise there would falsify the nominal wrench model that Theorem 1 depends on.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • A lateral disturbance no longer forces the airframe to pitch or roll to generate counter-thrust, so translation and rotation responses decouple; the tether-pull data show large displacement producing almost no rotation error.
  • Continuous multi-revolution rotation becomes a normal operating mode rather than a cable-unwinding hazard, which matters for pipe and duct inspection.
  • The same motion controller stabilizes contact tasks: valve turning, wall perching with nail pressing, and pushing a 30 kg wheeled board, with contact forces treated as disturbances.
  • The absence of motion capture and off-board computation means the MMR capabilities are not confined to a laboratory setting.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The miniaturizability claim is structural: the planar H-frame could shrink, but a palm-sized version has not been shown; two-axis gimbals, wire-routing slack, and eight motors per airframe set a practical floor the paper does not address.
  • Transient inter-rotor thrust cancellations used to avoid downwash consume energy without producing net wrench; quantifying that cost against the disturbance-rejection benefit would sharpen battery and actuator sizing.
  • The stability proof inherits the assumption that the counter-rotating pair cancels drag and gyroscopic torque perfectly; at higher gimbal angular rates or with asymmetric propeller wear, parasitic torques may reappear and require online identification.
  • If the claimed translation-rotation decoupling is as strong as shown, adding force/torque sensing at the end-effector should allow the same platform to close the loop on contact force, moving beyond open-loop position setpoints.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper presents MorphQuad, a quadrotor whose four rotor systems are each mounted on a two-axis gimbal, allowing near-arbitrary thrust vectoring while retaining a compact quadrotor layout. The authors claim to achieve three enablers: (I) maximum-thrust vectoring in any direction, (II) almost-everywhere stability while accounting for gimbal lock and inter-rotor downwash, and (III) a miniaturizable standard structure. The control contribution is a generalized geometric controller on SE(3), a minimum-norm thrust allocation augmented by a null-space correction to avoid gimbal lock and downwash, and an L1 adaptive augmentation. Hardware experiments with fully onboard VIO demonstrate continuous 720° rotation during pipe inspection, hand tracking while hovering, valve turning, perching/nailing, object pushing, and wind/push/pull resilience. Reported performance includes position RMSEs of 2–8 cm, orientation RMSEs below 6–7°, a maximum torque of 4.92 Nm, and a maximum lateral force of 4.55 kg. The theoretical centerpiece is Theorem 1, which claims exponential stability of the closed-loop tracking error, including in flight regimes that induce gimbal lock or inter-rotor downwash.

Significance. If the claims are fully supported, MorphQuad would be a meaningful advance over prior omnidirectional aerial platforms: it combines full thrust-vector authority with a quadrotor-like body and demonstrates demanding tasks without external motion capture. The paper's strengths include the coherent hardware design, the correct linear-algebraic derivation of the minimum-norm allocation (Proposition 2) and the wrench-preservation property of the null-space correction (Proposition 3), and a wide-ranging experimental campaign with fully onboard autonomy. These are real contributions. However, the central stability theorem is not actually proved for the gimbal-lock and downwash regimes stated, and the quantitative manipulation/resiliency claims rely on estimator-relative errors and unmeasured contact forces/torques. The paper is therefore scientifically promising but currently overclaims in load-bearing places.

major comments (3)
  1. [Materials and Methods: Theorem 1 and Proposition 3] The claim that Theorem 1 provides stability 'including in flight regimes that induce gimbal lock or inter-rotor downwash interference' is not established. The proof of Theorem 1 relies on Proposition 3, which is a correct linear-algebraic identity: the null-space correction leaves the commanded wrench unchanged under the nominal model (Eq. 8). But Proposition 3 says nothing about whether the chosen c_N actually keeps beta_i away from +/-pi/2 or prevents co-linear downwash for arbitrary commanded (f,tau). The rule in Eq. (16) is activated only when f is aligned with i_B or j_B; no proof is given for general force/torque commands. If the null-space correction ever fails to avoid the singularity or downwash, the physical delivered wrench deviates from Eq. (8) and the theorem's premise fails. The theorem should either be stated under the nominal wrench model without the 'including gimbal loc
  2. [Experiment setup: evaluation metric and VIO frame] The quantitative tracking results in Figures 5–7 are all reported in the world frame 'as estimated by the onboard state estimator,' with no ground-truth check. This is a load-bearing limitation because the paper's maneuverability and resiliency claims are built on RMSE values of 2–8 cm and 1–7°. Visual-inertial odometry can drift or suffer from scale/attitude error, especially during continuous 720° rotation, large 50–80 cm displacements, and wind-induced motion. Without motion capture, a total station, or another independent reference for at least representative trials, the reported RMSEs are not validated against the true trajectory. Please either add external ground-truth validation for key maneuvers or explicitly relabel all stated errors as 'estimator-relative' and soften the corresponding performance claims.
  3. [Results: manipulation and disturbance-force quantification] The paper states in 'Task implementation and evaluation metric' that the accuracy of contact force/torque is not evaluated and that no force/torque sensors are on board. Yet the abstract and Results claim human-wrist-level manipulation with a maximum torque of 4.92 Nm and a lateral force of 4.55 kg. The 4.92 Nm appears to be inferred from controller state/commands during hover rather than directly measured, and the 4.55 kg value is obtained from the inline force meter in the tether-pull resiliency experiment, not from the manipulation tasks. These are different quantities. The claim that MorphQuad generates 'lateral force comparable to its takeoff mass' and 'torque comparable to a human wrist' therefore needs direct measurement at the end effector or a clear statement that these are commanded/estimated values, not contact loads.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Contributions and Results: revolutions] The text says the vehicle 'achieves up to six full revolutions,' but the reported flight experiment is a continuous 720° rotation, which is two full revolutions, and the gimbal mechanical range is described as ±1080° (three revolutions). Please distinguish demonstrated flight rotation from mechanical gimbal range, and say explicitly whether the six-revolution figure is a hardware capability or an experimental result.
  2. [Materials and Methods: Eq. (14)] The two solution branches for beta_i are written compactly but the sign convention is easy to misread: the first uses sin^{-1}(-t_hat_{i,y}) and the second uses pi - sin^{-1}(t_hat_{i,y}). A short derivation or a sentence explaining how the branch and the 2kpi wrapping are chosen would improve clarity.
  3. [Materials and Methods: Eq. (16)] The indices c_N^2, c_N^4, and c_N^6 are not defined relative to the columns of the null-space basis N_M given in Eq. (20). Please specify the basis ordering or write the selection rule directly in terms of basis columns.
  4. [Table 1] The symbol '△' is used for Aerix but the legend only defines a cross; please add an explicit explanation of what △ means (e.g., unverifiable from patent disclosure).
  5. [Figure 2] The caption says 'Solid = actual, dashed = command' but the figure contains two panels with multiple time series. Add explicit axis labels and a legend distinguishing the simulated trajectories.
  6. [Supplementary Materials: Proof of Proposition 1] The proof uses 'sufficient limits on rotor velocities' without quantifying them. For the reachability claim to be practically meaningful, state the bounds on Omega_i and show that the required control inputs for the demonstrated trajectories are within those bounds, or soften the statement to nominal reachability with unbounded thrust.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Derivation chain is self-contained; only a minor self-referentiality in validation using the onboard estimator that also provides control feedback.

specific steps
  1. other [Results, 'Task implementation and evaluation metric'; Materials and Methods, 'State estimation']
    "Because MorphQuad achieves localization from onboard visual-inertial odometry, we report all tracking errors in the world frame as estimated by the onboard state estimator. ... The state feedback enables the generalized geometric controller to compute the desired force and torque for trajectory tracking."

    The reported tracking errors are produced by the same extended Kalman filter whose output is the feedback signal the controller drives to zero. Thus the position/orientation RMSE values are a self-referential measure of the control loop's own estimate, not an independently measured physical trajectory. This makes the experimental validation partly circular, though it is a validation weakness rather than a fitted parameter relabeled as a prediction and does not affect the algebraic derivation chain.

full rationale

The central derivation is not circular. The paper builds a wrench model (Eq. 2/5/8), an overactuated allocation t = M^dagger w (Eq. 12), and a null-space correction t = M^dagger w + N_M c_N (Eq. 15). Proposition 3 proves M(N_M c_N)=0, so the commanded wrench is preserved algebraically; Theorem 1 then applies the standard Lee et al. geometric-control Lyapunov argument to the resulting closed-loop error dynamics (23)-(26). That is a genuine mathematical derivation from the stated model, not a fit or a renaming of a known result. No parameter is fitted to a subset of data and then 'predicted' on a closely related quantity. The self-citation to the authors' prior MorphEUS work (ref. 52) is contextual, not load-bearing. The main caveat is not circularity but an overreach: the theorem's claim to hold 'including in flight regimes that induce gimbal lock or inter-rotor downwash interference' is not actually derived, since Proposition 3 only preserves the commanded wrench under the nominal model (Eq. 8), while the paper itself states that downwash 'invalidates the thrust model in (2)'. No downwash model enters Theorem 1, and Eq. 16 is a heuristic choice of the null-space coefficients. That is a correctness/support gap in the central claim, but not a circular reduction. Separately, the experimental evaluation uses the onboard estimator as both the controller feedback and the benchmark, a minor self-referentiality that supports the modest score of 2.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on a nominal aerodynamic model and a heuristic downwash-avoidance scheme, plus hand-tuned control gains. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • Controller gains kp, kv, kR, kω
    Hand-tuned to satisfy Lyapunov conditions (Eqs. 30, 34); values are not disclosed and no automated tuning procedure is given.
  • L1 adaptive control gain
    The L1 augmentation is mentioned but its adaptation gain is not specified; it is a chosen-by-hand parameter affecting disturbance rejection.
  • Null-space correction coefficients c_N
    The assignment in Eq. (16) is a design heuristic chosen to avoid downwash/gimbal-lock configurations; the signed thresholds are not derived from a physical downwash model.
  • Maximum revolution range n_r
    Limits the multi-revolution servo-command search; chosen by the designer to balance agility against servo travel constraints.
  • Body-frame acceleration feedforward for pushing task
    Open-loop task input added to sustain the push; no force measurement or feedback is used, so the magnitude is a hand-set control parameter.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Each coaxial counter-rotating rotor pair produces a pure thrust vector c_t G_i(α_i,β_i) Ω_i^2 with no body torque beyond the moment of that force (Eqs. 2, 5, 8).
    Underpins the wrench model and Proposition 3; assumes perfect cancellation of aerodynamic drag and gyroscopic precession.
  • ad hoc to paper The null-space correction (Eqs. 15–16) prevents downwash interference and gimbal lock in all commanded flight regimes.
    The correction is a signed-angle heuristic; no model of downwash is used and no proof shows it succeeds for all force directions.
  • domain assumption Rigid-body dynamics (Eqs. 1, 4) with no unmodeled flexible modes, motor/servo dynamics, or aerodynamic drag.
    Standard modeling assumption for multirotor control; the stability theorem covers this model only.
  • domain assumption The onboard visual-inertial state estimate is accurate enough to serve as ground truth for reported tracking errors.
    All RMSE values are computed in the estimator frame; no motion-capture or external ground truth is provided.
  • standard math Standard geometric-control stability background (Lee et al., ref 76).
    Theorem 1's proof inherits the Lyapunov structure and gain conditions from ref 76.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 29534 in / 19222 out tokens · 191518 ms · 2026-08-02T08:57:06.399326+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Infrastructure maintenance, contact-based inspection, and emergency response can benefit from aerial vehicles that act as a flying human hand with extreme maneuverability, manipulation, and resiliency (MMR): maneuverability to fly in arbitrary orientations to reach remote and tight locations; manipulation to point sensors, turn valves, and press tools at arbitrary orientations; resiliency to maintain accurate motion and force control despite disturbances from arbitrary directions, such as wind, ground effects, and friction. Realizing MMR on aerial vehicles requires not only omnidirectional flight; it also requires (I) vectoring of maximum thrust in any direction, to maximize capacity for contact-force application and disturbance rejection, (II) global stability, to enable control over any orientation/position, and (III) compact, standard designs that build upon platforms such as quadrotors to inherit technological know-how. No current aerial vehicle simultaneously enables I--III, due to structural and control limitations that constrain actuation. We present MorphQuad: a morphable quadrotor that enjoys MMR. Key to our approach is a hardware and control co-design: on hardware, we independently articulate each of the four rotor systems via two-axis gimbals; on control, we introduce globally-stable control, and energy-optimal thrust allocation that permits inter-rotor thrust cancellations only to avoid downwash interference and gimbal lock. With fully-onboard autonomy, MorphQuad demonstrates multi-revolution rotation while translating or hovering, for pipe inspection and target tracking (maneuverability); valve turning, perching, and object pressing and pushing with human-level strengths (manipulation); and wind rejection from any direction, even directed to a single rotor, and push-pull recovery (resiliency).

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.02764 by Amrith Malli Reddi, Andrew Scheffer, Andrew Zhao, Atharva Navsalkar, Hongyu Zhou, Jiawei Xu, Jose Diaz Peon Gonzalez Pacheco, Sashreek Shankar, Vasileios Tzoumas, Yuqing Bao.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: We present MorphQuad, a morphable quadrotor with extreme maneuverability, manip￾ulation, and resiliency (MMR). In hardware experiments with fully-onboard autonomy (no mo￾tion capture), MorphQuad demonstrates (A) maneuverability, to perform multi-revolution rotation while translating around a pipe or pointing at arbitrary directions while hovering; (B) manipulation, for pushing heavy objects, perching on wa… view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: We present MorphQuad, a morphable quadrotor that promises extreme maneuverability, manipulation, and resiliency (MMR). In hardware experiments with fully-onboard computation, localization, and trajectory execution without motion capture, MorphQuad demonstrates (A) ma￾neuverability, to perform continuous multi-revolution rotation while translating around a pipe or pointing at arbitrary directions while hove… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: (A) Major hardware components on MorphQuad that enable omnidirectional flight. (B) The autonomy pipeline of MorphQuad, color-coded by its corresponding hardware in (A). 10 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: We demonstrate the effectiveness of our thrust allocation that accounts for the gimbal lock, using the comparison of commanded and actual outer servo positions, αi . (A) illustrates the servo position with the null-space correction for gimbal lock and (B) without, in a simulated trajectory tracking task. The “vertical jumps” of the commanded servo position (blue dashed lines in the insert plot) in (B) mark… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Each rotor system pairs two stacked motors with a two-axis gimbal, pointing the thrust in any direction while both axes spin continuously. (A) The inner servo rotates the motor pair inside the duct; the outer servo rotates the ring through a belt-pulley drive. (B) The belt-pulley drive moves the outer servo off the rotation axis, leaving the center open for wires. (C) Two angles describe the thrust directi… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Maneuverability experiments. (A) Continual rotation during pipe inspection: Mor￾phQuad rotates around a pipe continually for 720◦ following a circular translation trajectory, its heading direction always pointing at the pipe. (B) Hovering and pointing for hand tracking: Mor￾phQuad tracks a human operator’s hand orientation from a fixed hover point using onboard vision, independently commanding roll, pitch,… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Each rotor system pairs two stacked motors with a two-axis gimbal, pointing the thrust in any direction while both axes spin continuously. (A) The inner servo rotates the motor pair inside the duct; the outer servo rotates the ring through a belt-pulley drive. (B) The belt-pulley drive moves the outer servo off the rotation axis, leaving the center open for wires. (C) Two angles describe the thrust directi… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Manipulation experiments. (A) Valve turning: MorphQuad approaches a wall-mounted valve and rotates the wheel by generating body torque. (B) Perching and nailing: MorphQuad transitions from nominal hover to a wall-parallel pose and presses a magnetically attached nail into a styrofoam target. (C) Pushing objects: MorphQuad perches onto a wheeled whiteboard and displaces it across the floor. 22 [PITH_FULL_I… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Maneuverability experiments. (A) Continuous rotation during pipe inspection: Mor￾phQuad rotates around a pipe continuously for 720◦ following a circular translation trajectory, its heading direction always pointing at the pipe. (B) Hovering and pointing for hand tracking: Mor￾phQuad tracks a human operator’s hand orientation from a fixed hover point using onboard vision, independently commanding roll, pitc… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Resiliency experiments. (A) Wind: MorphQuad holds a hover setpoint under time￾varying leaf-blower output. (B) Push and pick: MorphQuad endures impulsive translational and rotational displacements. (C) Pull: MorphQuad reacts to sustained pulling force. 24 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: (A) Schematic of the quadrotor highlighting coordinate frames and servo angles. (B) Force and torque envelopes of MorphQuad, assuming that each arm can apply a maximum thrust of 24.5 N. Force envelope assumes desired torque to be zero, and vice versa. Both envelopes are obtained assuming no thrust cancellation enabled for inter-rotor downwash avoidance. 31 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Resiliency experiments. (A) Wind: MorphQuad holds a hover setpoint under time￾varying leaf-blower output. (B) Push and pick: MorphQuad endures impulsive translational and rotational displacements. (C) Pull: MorphQuad reacts to sustained pulling force. 26 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: (A) Schematic of the quadrotor highlighting coordinate frames and servo angles. (B) Force and torque envelopes of MorphQuad, assuming that each arm can apply a maximum thrust of 24.5 N. Force envelope assumes desired torque to be zero, and vice versa. Both envelopes are obtained assuming no thrust cancellation enabled for inter-rotor downwash avoidance. 33 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_8.png] view at source ↗

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

86 extracted references · 2 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    S. Park, J. Lee, J. Ahn, M. Kim, J. Her, G.-H. Yang, D. Lee, Odar: Aerial manipulation plat- form enabling omnidirectional wrench generation.IEEE/ASME Transactions on mechatronics 23(4), 1907–1918 (2018). 41

    1907

  2. [2]

    D. Lee, B. Kim, H. J. Kim, Autonomous aerial manipulation at arbitrary pose in SE (3) with robust control and whole-body planning.The International Journal of Robotics Researchp. 02783649251378195 (2025)

    2025

  3. [3]

    Bodie, M

    K. Bodie, M. Brunner, M. Pantic, S. Walser, P. Pf¨andler, U. Angst, R. Siegwart, J. Nieto, Active interaction force control for contact-based inspection with a fully actuated aerial vehicle.IEEE Transactions on Robotics37(3), 709–722 (2020)

    2020

  4. [4]

    M. ´A. Trujillo, J. R. Mart´ınez-de Dios, C. Mart´ın, A. Viguria, A. Ollero, Novel aerial manipu- lator for accurate and robust industrial NDT contact inspection: A new tool for the oil and gas inspection industry.Sensors19(6), 1305 (2019)

    2019

  5. [5]

    Waharte, N

    S. Waharte, N. Trigoni, Supporting search and rescue operations with UA Vs, in2010 interna- tional conference on emerging security technologies(IEEE) (2010), pp. 142–147

    2010

  6. [6]

    Alawad, N

    W. Alawad, N. B. Halima, L. Aziz, An unmanned aerial vehicle (UA V) system for disaster and crisis management in smart cities.Electronics12(4), 1051 (2023)

    2023

  7. [7]

    Seneviratne, L

    D. Seneviratne, L. Ciani, M. Catelani, D. Galar,et al., Smart maintenance and inspection of linear assets: An Industry 4.0 approach.Acta Imeko7, 50–56 (2018)

    2018

  8. [8]

    Anand, C

    J. Anand, C. Aasish, S. S. Narayanan, R. A. Ahmed, Drones for disaster response and man- agement, inInternet of Drones(CRC Press), pp. 177–200 (2023)

    2023

  9. [9]

    S. Xing, X. Zhang, J. Tian, C. Xie, Z. Chen, J. Sun, Morphing quadrotors: Enhancing versa- tility and adaptability in drone applications—A review.Drones8(12), 762 (2024)

    2024

  10. [10]

    M. Lyu, Y . Zhao, C. Huang, H. Huang, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles for Search and Rescue: A Survey.Remote Sensing15(13) (2023), doi:10.3390/rs15133266,https://www.mdpi. com/2072-4292/15/13/3266

    doi:10.3390/rs15133266 2023

  11. [11]

    M. Zhao, F. Shi, T. Anzai, K. Chaudhary, X. Chen, K. Okada, M. Inaba, Flight motion of passing through small opening by dragon: Transformable multilinked aerial robot, in2018 42 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS)(IEEE) (2018), pp. 4735–4742

    2018

  12. [12]

    Niroui, K

    F. Niroui, K. Zhang, Z. Kashino, G. Nejat, Deep Reinforcement Learning Robot for Search and Rescue Applications: Exploration in Unknown Cluttered Environments.IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters4(2), 610–617 (2019), doi:10.1109/LRA.2019.2891991

    arXiv 2019

  13. [13]

    Ruggia, C

    M. Ruggia, C. Bermes, FLIFO: A Passively Morphing Drone for Small Gap Traversal, in 2025 International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems (ICUAS)(2025), pp. 214–221, doi:10.1109/ICUAS65942.2025.11007843

    arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    Nooralishahi, C

    P. Nooralishahi, C. Ibarra-Castanedo, S. Deane, F. L´opez, S. Pant, M. Genest, N. P. Avdelidis, X. P. Maldague, Drone-based non-destructive inspection of industrial sites: A review and case studies.Drones5(4), 106 (2021)

    2021

  15. [15]

    Ollero, M

    A. Ollero, M. Tognon, A. Suarez, D. Lee, A. Franchi, Past, present, and future of aerial robotic manipulators.IEEE Transactions on Robotics38(1), 626–645 (2021)

    2021

  16. [16]

    H. Yang, S. Park, J. Lee, J. Ahn, D. Son, D. Lee, LASDRA: Large-Size Aerial Skeleton System with Distributed Rotor Actuation, in2018 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA)(2018), pp. 7017–7023, doi:10.1109/ICRA.2018.8460713

    arXiv 2018

  17. [17]

    Z. Xing, Y . Zhang, C.-Y . Su, Active Wind Rejection Control for a Quadrotor UA V Against Unknown Winds.IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems59(6), 8956–8968 (2023), doi:10.1109/TAES.2023.3315254

    arXiv 2023

  18. [18]

    O’Connell, G

    M. O’Connell, G. Shi, X. Shi, K. Azizzadenesheli, A. Anandkumar, Y . Yue, S.-J. Chung, Neural-fly enables rapid learning for agile flight in strong winds.Science Robotics7(66), eabm6597 (2022). 43

    2022

  19. [19]

    T. Yang, K. Chai, J. Ji, Y . Wu, C. Xu, F. Gao, Ground-Effect-Aware Modeling and Control for Multicopters.IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics30(6), 7406–7417 (2025), doi: 10.1109/TMECH.2025.3583162

    arXiv 2025

  20. [20]

    Garofano-Soldado, G

    A. Garofano-Soldado, G. Heredia, A. Ollero, Aerodynamic interference in confined environ- ments with tilted propellers: Wall effect and corner effect, in2021 Aerial Robotic Systems Physically Interacting with the Environment (AIRPHARO)(IEEE) (2021), pp. 1–8

    2021

  21. [21]

    Watson, T

    R. Watson, T. Zhao, D. Zhang, G. Dobie, C. MacLeod, S. G. Pierce, A fly-crawl-fly UA V for full-circumference inspection of non-magnetic pipes via thrust adhesion.IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering22, 24278–24293 (2025)

    2025

  22. [22]

    Alexis, G

    K. Alexis, G. Darivianakis, M. Burri, R. Siegwart, Aerial robotic contact-based inspection: planning and control.Autonomous Robots40(4), 631–655 (2016)

    2016

  23. [23]

    J. Xu, L. Gao, R. Fierro, D. Salda ˜na, AirBender: Adaptive transportation of bendable objects using dual UA Vs.IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters10(3), 2790–2797 (2025)

    2025

  24. [24]

    Hamandi, F

    M. Hamandi, F. Usai, Q. Sabl ´e, N. Staub, M. Tognon, A. Franchi, Design of multirotor aerial vehicles: A taxonomy based on input allocation.The International Journal of Robotics Re- search40(8-9), 1015–1044 (2021)

    2021

  25. [25]

    H. Lin, J. Sun, H. Shi, L. Zhao, Configurations and control method of fully actuated multi- rotor unmanned aerial vehicle: A review, in2025 40th Youth Academic Annual Conference of Chinese Association of Automation (YAC)(IEEE) (2025), pp. 2240–2247

    2025

  26. [26]

    Y . Shu, Q. Meng, S. Wei, M. Ding, Y . Wang, X. Long, Z. Ke, W. Wei, A general analysis framework for multirotor thrust-vectoring vehicles: From configuration to modeling to data- driven approaches.Aerospace Science and Technology174, 111816 (2026). 44

    2026

  27. [27]

    Bodie, Z

    K. Bodie, Z. Taylor, M. Kamel, R. Siegwart, Towards efficient full pose omnidirectional- ity with overactuated mavs, inInternational symposium on experimental robotics(Springer) (2018), pp. 85–95

    2018

  28. [28]

    Y . Su, C. Chu, M. Wang, J. Li, L. Yang, Y . Zhu, H. Liu, Downwash-aware control allocation for over-actuated uav platforms, in2022 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS)(IEEE) (2022), pp. 10478–10485

    2022

  29. [29]

    J. A. Preiss, W. Honig, G. S. Sukhatme, N. Ayanian, Crazyswarm: A large nano-quadcopter swarm, in2017 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA)(IEEE) (2017), pp. 3299–3304

    2017

  30. [30]

    Brescianini, R

    D. Brescianini, R. D’Andrea, Design, modeling and control of an omni-directional aerial vehi- cle, in2016 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA)(IEEE) (2016), pp. 3261–3266

    2016

  31. [31]

    S. Park, J. Her, J. Kim, D. Lee, Design, modeling and control of omni-directional aerial robot, in2016 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS)(IEEE) (2016), pp. 1570–1575

    2016

  32. [32]

    Tognon, A

    M. Tognon, A. Franchi, Omnidirectional aerial vehicles with unidirectional thrusters: Theory, optimal design, and control.IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters3(3), 2277–2282 (2018)

    2018

  33. [33]

    Hamandi, K

    M. Hamandi, K. Sawant, M. Tognon, A. Franchi, Omni-plus-seven (O7+): An omnidirectional aerial prototype with a minimal number of unidirectional thrusters, in2020 International con- ference on unmanned aircraft systems (ICUAS)(IEEE) (2020), pp. 754–761

    2020

  34. [34]

    H. Lee, S. Cheng, Z. Wu, J. Lim, R. Siegwart, N. Hovakimyan, Geometric tracking control of omnidirectional multirotors for aggressive maneuvers.IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters 10(2), 1130–1137 (2024). 45

    2024

  35. [35]

    Veenstra, A

    R. Veenstra, A. Ali, C. Gabellieri, A. Franchi, 6D Physical Interaction with an Omnidirectional Aerial Robot.Drones10(2), 129 (2026)

    2026

  36. [36]

    M. Ryll, D. Bicego, M. Giurato, M. Lovera, A. Franchi, Fast-hex — a morphing hexarotor: design, mechanical implementation, control and experimental validation.IEEE/ASME trans- actions on mechatronics27(3), 1244–1255 (2021)

    2021

  37. [37]

    Aboudorra, C

    Y . Aboudorra, C. Gabellieri, R. Brantjes, Q. Sabl´e, A. Franchi, Modelling, analysis, and con- trol of omnimorph: an omnidirectional morphing multi-rotor uav.Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems110(1), 21 (2024)

    2024

  38. [38]

    M. Ryll, H. H. B ¨ulthoff, P. R. Giordano, Modeling and control of a quadrotor UA V with tilting propellers, in2012 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation(IEEE) (2012), pp. 4606–4613

    2012

  39. [39]

    M. Ryll, H. H. B ¨ulthoff, P. R. Giordano, A novel overactuated quadrotor unmanned aerial ve- hicle: Modeling, control, and experimental validation.IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology23(2), 540–556 (2014)

    2014

  40. [40]

    J. Li, J. Li, K. Kaneko, H. Liu, L. Shu, M. Zhao, Six-DoF Hand-Based Teleoperation for Omnidirectional Aerial Robots, in2025 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS)(IEEE) (2025), pp. 15482–15488

    2025

  41. [41]

    Kamel, S

    M. Kamel, S. Verling, O. Elkhatib, C. Sprecher, P. Wulkop, Z. Taylor, R. Siegwart, I. Gilitschenski, The voliro omniorientational hexacopter: An agile and maneuverable tiltable- rotor aerial vehicle.IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine25(4), 34–44 (2018)

    2018

  42. [42]

    R. Ji, J. Ma, S. S. Ge, Modeling and control of a tilting quadcopter.IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems56(4), 2823–2834 (2019)

    2019

  43. [43]

    Skygauge Inspection,https://www.skygauge.co/, accessed: 2025-12-28. 46

    2025

  44. [44]

    Y . Luo, X. Cao, M. Lu, N. Chen, P. Lu, Agile Flight Through Tilted Spaces Using a Single- Servo Tilt-Rotor Quadrotor.IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics(2026)

    2026

  45. [45]

    Y . Su, P. Yu, M. J. Gerber, L. Ruan, T.-C. Tsao, Nullspace-based control allocation of overac- tuated UA V platforms.IEEE robotics and automation letters6(4), 8094–8101 (2021)

    2021

  46. [46]

    M. Zhao, K. Kawasaki, T. Anzai, X. Chen, S. Noda, F. Shi, K. Okada, M. Inaba, Transformable multirotor with two-dimensional multilinks: Modeling, control, and whole-body aerial manip- ulation.The International Journal of Robotics Research37(9), 1085–1112 (2018)

    2018

  47. [47]

    M. Zhao, K. Okada, M. Inaba, Versatile articulated aerial robot DRAGON: Aerial manipula- tion and grasping by vectorable thrust control.The International Journal of Robotics Research 42(4-5), 214–248 (2023)

    2023

  48. [48]

    Zhao, Vectorable Thrust Control for Multimodal Locomotion of Quadruped Robot SPI- DAR.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.11551(2025)

    M. Zhao, Vectorable Thrust Control for Multimodal Locomotion of Quadruped Robot SPI- DAR.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.11551(2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  49. [49]

    Bodie, M

    K. Bodie, M. Brunner, M. Pantic, S. Walser, P. Pfndler, U. Angst, R. Siegwart, J. Nieto, An Omnidirectional Aerial Manipulation Platform for Contact-Based Inspection, inRobotics: Science and Systems XV(Robotics: Science and Systems Foundation) (2019), doi:10.15607/ rss.2019.xv.019,http://dx.doi.org/10.15607/RSS.2019.XV.019

    doi:10.15607/rss.2019.xv.019 2019

  50. [50]

    Mayounove, C

    H. Mayounove, C. Picaud, Omnidirectional Propelled Vehicle with Minimal Overall Dimen- sions (2023)

    2023

  51. [51]

    Mayounove, C

    H. Mayounove, C. Picaud, G. Nicolas, Omnidirectional Vectored-Thrust Vehicle Comprising a Unit for Controlling the Orientation of Thrusters (2025)

    2025

  52. [52]

    I. Bao, J. C. D. P. G. Pacheco, A. Navsalkar, A. Scheffer, S. Shankar, A. Zhao, H. Zhou, V . Tzoumas, MorphEUS: Morphable OmnidirEctional Unmanned System, inProceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), OCRAIM Workshop (2025),https://iral-morphable.github.io/. 47

    2025

  53. [53]

    Bouabdallah, P

    S. Bouabdallah, P. Murrieri, R. Siegwart, Design and control of an indoor micro quadrotor, inIEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2004. Proceedings. ICRA’04. 2004(IEEE), vol. 5 (2004), pp. 4393–4398

    2004

  54. [54]

    Mellinger, N

    D. Mellinger, N. Michael, V . Kumar, Trajectory generation and control for precise aggressive maneuvers with quadrotors.The International Journal of Robotics Research31(5), 664–674 (2012)

    2012

  55. [55]

    Michieletto, M

    G. Michieletto, M. Ryll, A. Franchi, Fundamental actuation properties of multirotors: Force– moment decoupling and fail–safe robustness.IEEE Transactions on Robotics34(3), 702–715 (2018)

    2018

  56. [56]

    M. W. Mueller, R. D’Andrea, Stability and control of a quadrocopter despite the complete loss of one, two, or three propellers, in2014 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA)(2014), pp. 45–52

    2014

  57. [57]

    Artale, C

    V . Artale, C. Milazzo, A. Ricciardello, Mathematical modeling of hexacopter.Applied mathe- matical sciences7(97), 4805–4811 (2013)

    2013

  58. [58]

    Rashad, J

    R. Rashad, J. Goerres, R. Aarts, J. B. C. Engelen, S. Stramigioli, Fully Actuated Multirotor UA Vs: A Literature Review.IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine27(3), 97–107 (2020), doi:10.1109/MRA.2019.2955964

    arXiv 2020

  59. [59]

    J. Xu, D. S. D’Antonio, D. Salda ˜na, H-modquad: Modular multi-rotors with 4, 5, and 6 con- trollable dof, in2021 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (IEEE) (2021), pp. 190–196

    2021

  60. [60]

    Falanga, K

    D. Falanga, K. Kleber, S. Mintchev, D. Floreano, D. Scaramuzza, The foldable drone: A morphing quadrotor that can squeeze and fly.IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters4(2), 209–216 (2018). 48

    2018

  61. [61]

    Rajappa, M

    S. Rajappa, M. Ryll, H. H. B ¨ulthoff, A. Franchi, Modeling, control and design optimization for a fully-actuated hexarotor aerial vehicle with tilted propellers, in2015 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA)(IEEE) (2015), pp. 4006–4013

    2015

  62. [62]

    Zheng, X

    P. Zheng, X. Tan, B. B. Kocer, E. Yang, M. Kovac, TiltDrone: A fully-actuated tilting quadro- tor platform.IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters5(4), 6845–6852 (2020)

    2020

  63. [63]

    S. H. Lee, Drone Having Multi-Degree-of-Freedom Flight Mode (2023)

    2023

  64. [64]

    X. Zhu, X. Zheng, K. Lu, H. Li, Omnidirectional Decoupled Circular Vector Tilt-Rotor Air- craft and Its Control Method (2024)

    2024

  65. [65]

    Cristobal, A

    J. Cristobal, A. Z. Zain Aldeen, M. Izadi, R. Faieghi, Gimballed Rotor Mechanism for Om- nidirectional Quadrotors, in2025 IEEE 21st International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE)(IEEE) (2025), pp. 3022–3027

    2025

  66. [66]

    M. Ryll, D. Bicego, A. Franchi, Modeling and control of FAST-Hex: A fully-actuated by synchronized-tilting hexarotor, in2016 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS)(IEEE) (2016), pp. 1689–1694

    2016

  67. [67]

    J. Lee, D. Lee, J. Lee, H. Lee, Y . Kim, H. J. Kim, Geometric Backstepping Control of Om- nidirectional Tiltrotors Incorporating Servo-Rotor Dynamics for Robustness against Sudden Disturbances, in2026 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (IEEE) (2026)

    2026

  68. [68]

    Zhang, Z

    W. Zhang, Z. Ma, J. Li, H. Wang, H. Liu, J. Sugihara, C. Chen, Y . Chen, M. Zhao, Learning Agile and Robust Omnidirectional Aerial Motion on Overactuated Tiltable-Quadrotors.arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.21583(2026)

    arXiv 2026

  69. [69]

    Allenspach, K

    M. Allenspach, K. Bodie, M. Brunner, L. Rinsoz, Z. Taylor, M. Kamel, R. Siegwart, J. Nieto, Design and optimal control of a tiltrotor micro-aerial vehicle for efficient omnidirectional flight.The International Journal of Robotics Research39(10-11), 1305–1325 (2020). 49

    2020

  70. [70]

    Cuniato, M

    E. Cuniato, M. Allenspach, T. Stastny, H. Oleynikova, R. Siegwart, M. Pantic, Allocation for omnidirectional aerial robots: Incorporating power dynamics.IEEE Transactions on Robotics (2026)

    2026

  71. [71]

    N. J. Seo, T. J. Armstrong, J. A. Ashton-Miller, D. B. Chaffin, Wrist strength is dependent on simultaneous power grip intensity.Ergonomics51(10), 1594–1605 (2008)

    2008

  72. [72]

    Nesbitt,Handbook of valves and actuators: valves manual international(Elsevier) (2011)

    B. Nesbitt,Handbook of valves and actuators: valves manual international(Elsevier) (2011)

    2011

  73. [73]

    Huang, R

    K. Huang, R. Rana, A. Spitzer, G. Shi, B. Boots, Datt: Deep adaptive trajectory tracking for quadrotor control.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.09053(2023)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  74. [74]

    Michael, D

    N. Michael, D. Mellinger, Q. Lindsey, V . Kumar, The grasp multiple micro-uav testbed.IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine17(3), 56–65 (2010)

    2010

  75. [75]

    Mellinger, V

    D. Mellinger, V . Kumar, Minimum snap trajectory generation and control for quadrotors, in 2011 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation(IEEE) (2011), pp. 2520– 2525

    2011

  76. [76]

    T. Lee, M. Leok, N. H. McClamroch, Geometric tracking control of a quadrotor UA V on SE (3), in49th IEEE conference on decision and control (CDC)(IEEE) (2010), pp. 5420–5425

    2010

  77. [77]

    Zheng, W

    C. Zheng, W. Xu, Z. Zou, T. Hua, C. Yuan, D. He, B. Zhou, Z. Liu, J. Lin, F. Zhu,et al., Fast- livo2: Fast, direct lidar–inertial–visual odometry.IEEE Transactions on Robotics41, 326–346 (2024)

    2024

  78. [78]

    Y . Ren, F. Zhu, G. Lu, Y . Cai, L. Yin, F. Kong, J. Lin, N. Chen, F. Zhang, Safety-assured high-speed navigation for mavs.Science Robotics10(98), eado6187 (2025)

    2025

  79. [79]

    H. Zhou, V . Tzoumas, Simultaneous system identification and model predictive control with no dynamic regret.IEEE Transactions on Robotics(2025). 50

    2025

  80. [80]

    E. Tal, S. Karaman, Accurate tracking of aggressive quadrotor trajectories using incremental nonlinear dynamic inversion and differential flatness.IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology29(3), 1203–1218 (2020)

    2020

Showing first 80 references.