Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 47 references

This survey argues that neurosymbolic AI — neural pattern learning fused with explicit symbolic rules — is the key to making advanced air mobility safe, transparent, and certifiable, and maps where the field stands.

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 ↗

A survey mapping how neurosymbolic AI could address safety, regulatory, and operational challenges in advanced air mobility.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-05 challenge →

load-bearing objection Useful roadmap with an overreaching 'comprehensive survey' claim and a battery error; worth refereeing after rework. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2508.07163 v1 pith:VILLLKO2 submitted 2025-08-10 cs.RO cs.AIcs.NE

Integrating Neurosymbolic AI in Advanced Air Mobility: A Comprehensive Survey

Kamal Acharya , Iman Sharifi , Mehul Lad , Liang Sun , Houbing Song This is my paper
classification cs.RO cs.AIcs.NE
keywords neurosymbolic AIadvanced air mobilityurban air mobilityeVTOLneurosymbolic reinforcement learningair traffic managementaviation safetysurvey
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.

The reading

The paper sets out to show that advanced air mobility (AAM) — electric vertical take-off and landing aircraft, drone delivery, and urban air taxis — faces problems pure deep learning cannot solve alone. It argues that neurosymbolic AI, which couples neural pattern recognition with explicit symbolic rules, is a natural fit for a safety-critical, regulation-heavy industry. The survey organizes a fragmented literature into eight application areas and claims to be the first review of the intersection as a whole. If the framing holds, it gives researchers, operators, and regulators a shared map of where hybrid methods already help, where they fall short, and what must be built before certification becomes feasible.

Core claim

The central claim is that neurosymbolic AI can deliver the transparency, adaptability, and performance that AAM demands, where neither pure neural nor pure symbolic systems suffice. Across electrification, aircraft design, training and simulation, predictive maintenance, safety, autonomy, cybersecurity, and demand modeling, the paper identifies concrete hybrid mechanisms: symbolic logic constraints that shield neural policies from unsafe actions, case-based reasoning combined with Bayesian networks for fault diagnosis, decision trees injected into neural networks for interpretable demand forecasts, and knowledge graphs plus logic tensor networks for cyber defense. The paper's own assessment

What carries the argument

The organizing mechanism is the hybrid neurosymbolic architecture itself: a neural component learns patterns from large, heterogeneous data streams while a symbolic component encodes airspace rules, safety protocols, and regulatory constraints. The survey uses this pairing as a lens to classify applications into learning-for-reasoning, reasoning-for-learning, and fully integrated learning-reasoning systems, and to evaluate which AAM tasks are ready for hybrid methods and which are not.

Load-bearing premise

The paper's standing as a 'first roadmap' rests on the claim, made without a documented search protocol, that no comparable review of neurosymbolic AI in advanced air mobility already exists.

What would settle it

Locate a peer-reviewed survey published before 2025 that already reviews neurosymbolic AI applications across multiple AAM domains; that single finding would reduce the paper's contribution from 'first comprehensive roadmap' to one more taxonomy.

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

If this is right

  • Neurosymbolic reinforcement learning can optimize dynamic flight paths and traffic management in real time while keeping decisions inside regulatory and safety bounds.
  • Symbolic 'shields' can block unsafe actions during neural policy training, a concrete route toward the safety assurance aviation regulators require.
  • Demand forecasting gains interpretability without losing accuracy when rule-based models such as decision trees are embedded in neural networks.
  • The same hybrid pattern extends across the AAM stack, from battery and propulsion design to predictive maintenance and cyber defense, creating a unified research agenda.
  • The roadmap identifies certification of evolving, adaptive AI systems as a critical gap that must be closed before deployment can proceed.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • A natural next step the paper leaves implicit is a standardized benchmark: run neural-only and neurosymbolic policies on the same AAM conflict-resolution scenarios and measure safety violations, data efficiency, and runtime.
  • The evidence the survey assembles suggests progress will come as much from regulatory sandboxes and certification experiments as from new architectures, since the aviation-authority roadmaps it examines are where the hard requirements are set.
  • The same rule-plus-learning pattern may transfer to other safety-critical mobility domains — autonomous rail, maritime shipping, or ground logistics — where black-box decisions are the main adoption barrier.
  • A testable extension of the demand-modeling results is whether injecting symbolic constraints reduces the amount of training data needed to reach a target forecast accuracy in a new city or airspace.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper surveys the intersection of Neurosymbolic AI and Advanced Air Mobility (AAM). It reviews background on neurosymbolic paradigms and AAM technologies, then organizes applications into eight domains (electrification, aircraft design, training/simulation, predictive maintenance, safety, autonomy, cybersecurity, demand modeling). It presents FAA and EASA AI roadmaps as case studies, discusses technological, ethical, and regulatory challenges, and concludes that neurosymbolic AI promises transparent, adaptable, high-performance solutions for AAM. The authors explicitly claim this is the first comprehensive review of neurosymbolic AI in AAM and that it provides a roadmap for researchers and practitioners.

Significance. If the paper's framing holds, it would be a valuable organizing resource: it compiles disparate threads, links them to AAM domain requirements, and highlights certification and explainability challenges that are central to aviation deployment. The paper also gives concrete attention to FAA/EASA regulatory trajectories, which is useful. However, the central value claim—that there is a measurable, fragmented body of existing neurosymbolic-AAM integration work that this survey comprehensively classifies—is weakly supported by the cited evidence. Many cited works are adjacent-domain or general neurosymbolic studies, not AAM integrations. The paper also contains a clear factual error in the battery energy density claim, and the 'first comprehensive review' assertion is made without a documented search protocol. These issues affect the paper's core contribution as currently framed, though they are fixable through reframing and correction.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.1 (Electrification)] The text states lithium-ion batteries offer 'over 800 Wh/kg for narrow-body aircraft' and cites [Barrera et al., 2022]. This is a factual error: current lithium-ion cells are around 250–300 Wh/kg, and even next-generation concepts discussed in the cited paper are well below 800 Wh/kg at the battery level. This error casts doubt on the accuracy of the domain-specific statements throughout the survey. It should be corrected and re-verified against the cited source.
  2. [§1 (Introduction) and §3 (Application Areas)] The paper's core claim of being 'the first comprehensive review' and of surveying 'ongoing research efforts' at the neurosymbolic-AAM intersection is not substantiated. No search protocol, inclusion criteria, or database coverage is provided. More importantly, the Section 3 citations do not support the existence of a substantial body of neurosymbolic-AAM integrations: §3.4 cites a fault-diagnosis paper for embedded software (Yang et al. 2018) and an industrial digital-twin paper (Siyaev et al. 2023) that are not AAM-specific; §3.5 cites probabilistic shields (Jansen et al. 2020), an autonomous-driving neurosymbolic RL paper (Sharifi et al. 2023), and logical neural networks (Kimura et al. 2021) with no AAM application; §3.6 cites a general neurosymbolic computing survey (Wang et al. 2024); §3.7 cites cyber-attack work on automated vehicles (Petit and Shladover 2014) and general neurosymb
  3. [§1, §2.1, §5.2 (reliance on self-citations)] Several load-bearing claims about the promise of Neurosymbolic Reinforcement Learning and its benefits are supported exclusively or primarily by the authors' own prior work: [Acharya et al., 2023] in the Introduction and §5.2, [Acharya et al., 2025] in §3.8, and [Sharifi et al., 2023] in §3.5. At least two of these are arXiv preprints rather than peer-reviewed publications. For a survey whose contribution is synthesis, the authors should either justify the representativeness of these sources with independent corroboration or clearly flag the evidence level (e.g., 'the authors' own proposal') when using them to assert that a method 'has shown potential.' Otherwise the survey risks circularity in its central claims.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§3.6 (Autonomy)] There is a typo: 'UA Vs' should be 'UAVs.' Please also standardize spelling of 'unnanned/autonomous' terminology throughout.
  2. [§1 and §2.2] The paper uses 'illustrates' and 'depicts' for Figures 1–3, but the figures are not explicitly referenced in the surrounding text with the expected regularity. Ensure each figure is cited at the point where it is first discussed and that captions are self-contained.
  3. [§5.3 (Certification)] The sentence 'The FAA has made limited progress...' cites a DOT OIG audit report via a URL in a footnote. For a survey, please provide the full formal reference (report number, date, title) in the reference list so readers can verify the claim without following an unlabeled URL.
  4. [References] Some references lack full page numbers or are arXiv preprints without a 'submitted/under review' status. For a survey, it would help to add DOIs where available and to mark preprint status consistently. Also, the 'Gilpin and Ilievski, 2021' reference has page numbers '15(3):123–145' that appear to be an invented journal-style volume; please verify this reference.
  5. [§4 (Case Studies)] The FAA and EASA case studies are informative but are summarized from official documents without critical assessment. The paper does not explain how neurosymbolic AI specifically addresses the certification gaps beyond generic statements. A short table or bullet list mapping each roadmap gap to a concrete neurosymbolic mechanism would improve the utility of this section.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the survey makes no derived predictions and its self-citations are not load-bearing.

full rationale

This is a survey paper with no formal derivation chain, no equations, no fitted parameters, and no predictions computed from data. The paper's contributions are a literature taxonomy, a set of application-area narratives, and proposed research directions. Its central claim—that neurosymbolic AI holds promise for Advanced Air Mobility—is supported by multiple independent external references (e.g., Garcez and Lamb 2023, Kautz 2022, Kohaut et al. 2024) as well as by the authors' own prior surveys and preprints. The self-citations (Acharya et al. 2023, Sharifi et al. 2023, Acharya et al. 2025) are used as examples of related work or as evidence that specific neurosymbolic techniques exist, but they do not constitute the sole justification for the paper's main conclusions. The 'first comprehensive review' claim is an observational novelty assertion; even if it were overclaimed, it would be a coverage or search-protocol concern, not a circularity. No step in the paper reduces, by construction or by self-referential definition, to its own inputs. Therefore the appropriate finding is no significant circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

No mathematical derivation, no fitted parameters, and no invented entities. The paper is a qualitative survey; its claims rest on cited references and qualitative reasoning, not on axioms, free parameters, or new postulated entities introduced here.

reviewed 2026-08-05 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Integrating Neurosymbolic AI in Advanced Air Mobility: A Comprehensive Survey." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VILLLKO2

@misc{pith2026250807163,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Integrating Neurosymbolic AI in Advanced Air Mobility: A Comprehensive Survey},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VILLLKO2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.07163}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Neurosymbolic AI combines neural network adaptability with symbolic reasoning, promising an approach to address the complex regulatory, operational, and safety challenges in Advanced Air Mobility (AAM). This survey reviews its applications across key AAM domains such as demand forecasting, aircraft design, and real-time air traffic management. Our analysis reveals a fragmented research landscape where methodologies, including Neurosymbolic Reinforcement Learning, have shown potential for dynamic optimization but still face hurdles in scalability, robustness, and compliance with aviation standards. We classify current advancements, present relevant case studies, and outline future research directions aimed at integrating these approaches into reliable, transparent AAM systems. By linking advanced AI techniques with AAM's operational demands, this work provides a concise roadmap for researchers and practitioners developing next-generation air mobility solutions.

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

47 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Neurosymbolic reinforcement learning and planning: A survey

    [Acharya et al., 2023] Kamal Acharya, Waleed Raza, Carlos Dourado, Alvaro Velasquez, and Houbing Herbert Song. Neurosymbolic reinforcement learning and planning: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Artificial Intelligence,

    work page 2023

  2. [5]

    Transforming healthcare delivery with advanced air mobility: A rural study with gis-based optimization

    [Bridgelall and Tolliver, 2024] Raj Bridgelall and Denver Tolliver. Transforming healthcare delivery with advanced air mobility: A rural study with gis-based optimization. Sustainability, 16(13):5709,

    work page 2024

  3. [7]

    A reinforcement learning approach to vehicle coordination for structured advanced air mo- bility

    [Deniz et al., 2024] Sabrullah Deniz, Yufei Wu, Yang Shi, and Zhenbo Wang. A reinforcement learning approach to vehicle coordination for structured advanced air mo- bility. Green Energy and Intelligent Transportation , 3(2):100157,

    work page 2024

  4. [8]

    Cellular connectivity for ad- vanced air mobility: Use cases and beamforming ap- proaches

    [Do et al., 2024] Hieu Do, Ramon Delgado Pulgar, G ´abor Fodor, and Zhiqiang Qi. Cellular connectivity for ad- vanced air mobility: Use cases and beamforming ap- proaches. IEEE Communications Standards Magazine , 8(1):65–71,

    work page 2024

  5. [9]

    Power electronic converters in electric aircraft: Current status, challenges, and emerg- ing technologies

    [Dorn-Gomba et al., 2020] Lea Dorn-Gomba, John Ramoul, John Reimers, and Ali Emadi. Power electronic converters in electric aircraft: Current status, challenges, and emerg- ing technologies. IEEE Transactions on Transportation Electrification, 6(4):1648–1664,

    work page 2020

  6. [12]

    Bias and discrimi- nation in ai: a cross-disciplinary perspective

    [Ferrer et al., 2021] Xavier Ferrer, Tom Van Nuenen, Jose M Such, Mark Cot ´e, and Natalia Criado. Bias and discrimi- nation in ai: a cross-disciplinary perspective. IEEE Tech- nology and Society Magazine, 40(2):72–80,

    work page 2021

  7. [13]

    Neurosymbolic ai: The 3 rd wave

    [Garcez and Lamb, 2023] Artur d’Avila Garcez and Luis C Lamb. Neurosymbolic ai: The 3 rd wave. Artificial Intel- ligence Review, 56(11):12387–12406,

    work page 2023

  8. [14]

    Neuro-symbolic reasoning in the traffic domain

    [Gilpin and Ilievski, 2021] Leilani H Gilpin and Filip Ilievski. Neuro-symbolic reasoning in the traffic domain. J AI Res, 15(3):123–145,

    work page 2021

  9. [15]

    Advanced air mobility: Opportunities and challenges de- ploying evtols for air ambulance service.Applied Sciences, 12(3):1183,

    [Goyal and Cohen, 2022] Rohit Goyal and Adam Cohen. Advanced air mobility: Opportunities and challenges de- ploying evtols for air ambulance service.Applied Sciences, 12(3):1183,

    work page 2022

  10. [16]

    Advanced air mobility: Demand analysis and market potential of the airport shuttle and air taxi markets

    [Goyal et al., 2021] Rohit Goyal, Colleen Reiche, Chris Fer- nando, and Adam Cohen. Advanced air mobility: Demand analysis and market potential of the airport shuttle and air taxi markets. Sustainability, 13(13):7421,

    work page 2021

  11. [17]

    On the use of neurosymbolic ai for defending against cyber attacks

    [Grov et al., 2024] Gudmund Grov, Jonas Halvorsen, Mag- nus Wiik Eckhoff, Bjørn Jervell Hansen, Martin Eian, and Vasileios Mavroeidis. On the use of neurosymbolic ai for defending against cyber attacks. In International Confer- ence on Neural-Symbolic Learning and Reasoning , pages 119–140. Springer,

    work page 2024

  12. [18]

    V2v uas communications and use cases for advanced air mobility

    [G¨ur et al., 2024] G¨urkan G ¨ur, Kamesh Namuduri, Stefano Savazzi, Saba Al-Rubaye, Ashwin Ashok, Sven G Bil ´en, Ivan Petrunin, Marco Hernandez, Shane Nicoll, and Ba- tool Dalloul. V2v uas communications and use cases for advanced air mobility. In 2024 IEEE Conference on Stan- dards for Communications and Networking (CSCN), pages 103–107. IEEE,

    work page 2024

  13. [19]

    Neuro-symbolic ai for military applica- tions

    [Hagos and Rawat, 2024] Desta Haileselassie Hagos and Danda B Rawat. Neuro-symbolic ai for military applica- tions. IEEE Transactions on Artificial Intelligence,

    work page 2024

  14. [20]

    Uam vision concept of operations (conops) uam maturity level (uml)

    [Hill et al., 2020] Brian P Hill, Dwight DeCarme, Matt Met- calfe, Christine Griffin, Sterling Wiggins, Chris Metts, Bill Bastedo, Michael D Patterson, and Nancy L Mendonca. Uam vision concept of operations (conops) uam maturity level (uml)

    work page 2020

  15. [21]

    [Jalaian and Bastian, 2023] Brian Jalaian and Nathaniel D. Bastian. Neurosymbolic ai in cybersecurity: Bridging pat- tern recognition and symbolic reasoning. In IEEE MIL- COM 2023, pages 268–273, October

    work page 2023

  16. [23]

    Nasa concept vehicles and the engineering of advanced air mo- bility aircraft

    [Johnson and Silva, 2022] W Johnson and C Silva. Nasa concept vehicles and the engineering of advanced air mo- bility aircraft. The Aeronautical Journal, 126(1295):59– 91,

    work page 2022

  17. [24]

    Ensuring UAV Safety: A Vision-only and Real-time Framework for Collision Avoidance Through Object Detection, Tracking, and Distance Estimation

    [Karampinis et al., 2024] Vasileios Karampinis, Anastasios Arsenos, Orfeas Filippopoulos, Evangelos Petrongonas, Christos Skliros, Dimitrios Kollias, Stefanos Kollias, and Athanasios V oulodimos. Ensuring uav safety: A vision- only and real-time framework for collision avoidance through object detection, tracking, and distance estima- tion. arXiv preprint...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  18. [25]

    The third ai summer: Aaai robert s

    [Kautz, 2022] Henry Kautz. The third ai summer: Aaai robert s. engelmore memorial lecture. Ai magazine , 43(1):105–125,

    work page 2022

  19. [26]

    Advanced sensor technologies in cavs for traditional and smart road condition monitoring: A review

    [Khanmohamadi and Guerrieri, 2024] Masoud Khan- mohamadi and Marco Guerrieri. Advanced sensor technologies in cavs for traditional and smart road condition monitoring: A review. Sustainability, 16(19),

    work page 2024

  20. [27]

    A holistic review of the current state of research on air- craft design concepts and consideration for advanced air mobility applications

    [Kiesewetter et al., 2023] Lukas Kiesewetter, Kazi Hassan Shakib, Paramvir Singh, Mizanur Rahman, Bhupendra Khandelwal, Sudarshan Kumar, and Krishna Shah. A holistic review of the current state of research on air- craft design concepts and consideration for advanced air mobility applications. Progress in Aerospace Sciences , 142:100949,

    work page 2023

  21. [28]

    Reinforcement Learning with External Knowledge by using Logical Neural Networks

    [Kimura et al., 2021] Daiki Kimura, Subhajit Chaudhury, Akifumi Wachi, Ryosuke Kohita, Asim Munawar, Michi- aki Tatsubori, and Alexander Gray. Reinforcement learn- ing with external knowledge by using logical neural net- works. arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.02363,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  22. [29]

    Probabilistic mission design in neuro-symbolic systems

    [Kohaut et al., 2024] Simon Kohaut, Benedict Flade, Daniel Ochs, Devendra Singh Dhami, Julian Eggert, and Kristian Kersting. Probabilistic mission design in neuro-symbolic systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.01439,

    work page arXiv 2024

  23. [30]

    Demand analysis in urban air mobility: A literature review

    [Long et al., 2023] Qi Long, Jun Ma, Feifeng Jiang, and Christopher John Webster. Demand analysis in urban air mobility: A literature review. Journal of Air Transport Management, 112:102436,

    work page 2023

  24. [31]

    The neuro- symbolic concept learner: Interpreting scenes, words, and sentences from natural supervision

    [Mao et al., 2019] Jiayuan Mao, Chuang Gan, Pushmeet Kohli, Joshua B Tenenbaum, and Jiajun Wu. The neuro- symbolic concept learner: Interpreting scenes, words, and sentences from natural supervision. arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.12584,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  25. [33]

    Digital twin approach for integrated airspace management with applications to advanced air mobility services

    [Namuduri, 2023] Kamesh Namuduri. Digital twin approach for integrated airspace management with applications to advanced air mobility services. IEEE Open Journal of Ve- hicular Technology,

    work page 2023

  26. [34]

    In-time Aviation Safety Management: Challenges and Research for an Evolving Aviation System

    [National Academies of Sciences et al., 2018] National Academies of Sciences et al. In-time Aviation Safety Management: Challenges and Research for an Evolving Aviation System. National Academies Press,

    work page 2018

  27. [36]

    Accountability in artificial intel- ligence: what it is and how it works

    [Novelli et al., 2024] Claudio Novelli, Mariarosaria Taddeo, and Luciano Floridi. Accountability in artificial intel- ligence: what it is and how it works. Ai & Society , 39(4):1871–1882,

    work page 2024

  28. [37]

    Potential cyberattacks on automated vehicles

    [Petit and Shladover, 2014] Jonathan Petit and Steven E Shladover. Potential cyberattacks on automated vehicles. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent transportation systems , 16(2):546–556,

    work page 2014

  29. [39]

    Urban air mobility community noise test plan- ning

    [Rizzi and Scata Jr, 2022] Stephen A Rizzi and Donald S Scata Jr. Urban air mobility community noise test plan- ning. In 183rd Meeting of the Acoustical Society of Amer- ica,

    work page 2022

  30. [40]

    Towards safe autonomous driving policies using a neuro-symbolic deep reinforcement learning ap- proach

    [Sharifi et al., 2023] Iman Sharifi, Mustafa Yildirim, and Saber Fallah. Towards safe autonomous driving policies using a neuro-symbolic deep reinforcement learning ap- proach. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.01316,

    work page arXiv 2023

  31. [41]

    Vtol urban air mobility concept vehicles for technology development

    [Silva et al., 2018] Christopher Silva, Wayne R Johnson, Ed- uardo Solis, Michael D Patterson, and Kevin R Antcliff. Vtol urban air mobility concept vehicles for technology development. In 2018 Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference, page 3847,

    work page 2018

  32. [42]

    Interaction with industrial digital twin us- ing neuro-symbolic reasoning

    [Siyaev et al., 2023] Aziz Siyaev, Dilmurod Valiev, and Geun-Sik Jo. Interaction with industrial digital twin us- ing neuro-symbolic reasoning. Sensors, 23(3):1729,

    work page 2023

  33. [43]

    A data & reasoning fabric to en- able advanced air mobility

    [Van Dalsem et al., 2021] William Van Dalsem, Sandeep Shetye, Aditya N Das, Kalmanje S Krishnakumar, Sandy Lozito, Kenneth Freeman, Aaron Swank, Peter Shannon, and Luka Tomljenovic. A data & reasoning fabric to en- able advanced air mobility. In AIAA Scitech 2021 Forum, page 2033,

    work page 2021

  34. [44]

    Towards data-and knowledge-driven ai: a survey on neuro- symbolic computing

    [Wang et al., 2024] Wenguan Wang, Yi Yang, and Fei Wu. Towards data-and knowledge-driven ai: a survey on neuro- symbolic computing. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Anal- ysis and Machine Intelligence,

    work page 2024

  35. [45]

    Optimized fault diagnosis based on fmea-style cbr and bn for embedded software system

    [Yang et al., 2018] Shunkun Yang, Chong Bian, Xing Li, Lin Tan, and Dongxiao Tang. Optimized fault diagnosis based on fmea-style cbr and bn for embedded software system. The International Journal of Advanced Manufac- turing Technology, 94:3441–3453,

    work page 2018

  36. [46]

    Risk perceptions using urban and advanced air mobility (uam/aam) by applying a mixed method approach

    [Yoo et al., 2022] Jaeho Yoo, Yunseon Choe, and Soo-i Rim. Risk perceptions using urban and advanced air mobility (uam/aam) by applying a mixed method approach. Sus- tainability, 14(24):16338,

    work page 2022

  37. [47]

    A survey on neural-symbolic learn- ing systems

    [Yu et al., 2023] Dongran Yu, Bo Yang, Dayou Liu, Hui Wang, and Shirui Pan. A survey on neural-symbolic learn- ing systems. Neural Networks, 2023

    work page 2023

  38. [2014]

    Addressing the emer- gence of drones–a policy development framework for regional drone transportation systems

    [Raghunatha et al., 2023] Aishwarya Raghunatha, Patrik Thollander, and Stephan Barthel. Addressing the emer- gence of drones–a policy development framework for regional drone transportation systems. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 18:100795,

    work page 2023

  39. [2018]

    Artificial-intelligence-based maintenance decision-making and optimization for multi- state component systems

    [Nguyen et al., 2022] Van-Thai Nguyen, Phuc Do, Alexan- dre V osin, and Benoit Iung. Artificial-intelligence-based maintenance decision-making and optimization for multi- state component systems. Reliability Engineering & Sys- tem Safety, 228:108757,

    work page 2022

  40. [2019]

    Characterizing performance tradeoffs from air traffic man- agement services for advanced air mobility

    [Murc ¸aet al., 2024] Mayara Cond ´e Rocha Murc ¸a, Wallace Silva Sant’Anna Souza, and Jo ˜ao Vitor Turchetti Ribeiro. Characterizing performance tradeoffs from air traffic man- agement services for advanced air mobility. Journal of Aerospace Information Systems, pages 1–14,

    work page 2024

  41. [2020]

    Benefits of advanced air mobility for society and environment: A case study of ohio

    [Dulia et al., 2021] Esrat F Dulia, Mir S Sabuj, and Syed AM Shihab. Benefits of advanced air mobility for society and environment: A case study of ohio. Applied Sciences , 12(1):207,

    work page 2021

  42. [2021]

    In-time system-wide safety assurance (issa) concept of operations and design considerations for urban air mobility (uam)

    [Ellis et al., 2020] Kyle Ellis, John Koelling, Misty Davies, and Paul Krois. In-time system-wide safety assurance (issa) concept of operations and design considerations for urban air mobility (uam)

    work page 2020

  43. [2022]

    International ai safety report

    [Bengio et al., 2025] Yoshua Bengio, S ¨oren Mindermann, Daniel Privitera, Tamay Besiroglu, Rishi Bommasani, Stephen Casper, Yejin Choi, Philip Fox, Ben Garfinkel, Danielle Goldfarb, et al. International ai safety report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.17805,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  44. [2023]

    Neurosymbolic AI for Travel Demand Prediction: Integrating Decision Tree Rules into Neural Networks

    [Acharya et al., 2025] Kamal Acharya, Mehul Lad, Liang Sun, and Houbing Song. Neurosymbolic ai for travel de- mand prediction: Integrating decision tree rules into neural networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.01680,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  45. [2024]

    Advanced air mobility: Opportunities, challenges, and research needsfor the state of california (2023-2030)

    [Cohen and Shaheen, 2024] Adam Cohen and Susan Sha- heen. Advanced air mobility: Opportunities, challenges, and research needsfor the state of california (2023-2030)

    work page 2024

  46. [2025]

    Next-generation avia- tion li-ion battery technologies—enabling electrified air- craft

    [Barrera et al., 2022] Thomas P Barrera, James R Bond, Marty Bradley, Rob Gitzendanner, Eric C Darcy, Michael Armstrong, and Chao-Yang Wang. Next-generation avia- tion li-ion battery technologies—enabling electrified air- craft. The Electrochemical Society Interface , 31(3):69,

    work page 2022

  47. [7586]

    Safe re- inforcement learning using probabilistic shields

    [Jansen et al., 2020] Nils Jansen, Bettina K¨onighofer, Sebas- tian Junges, Alex Serban, and Roderick Bloem. Safe re- inforcement learning using probabilistic shields. In 31st International Conference on Concurrency Theory (CON- CUR 2020). Schloss-Dagstuhl-Leibniz Zentrum f ¨ur Infor- matik,

    work page 2020

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 5, 2026.