4.6 Article

The UAV Path Coverage Algorithm Based on the Greedy Strategy and Ant Colony Optimization

期刊

ELECTRONICS
卷 11, 期 17, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/electronics11172667

关键词

UAVs; path planning; path coverage; secondary advantage; minimum time and maximum coverage (MTMC)

资金

  1. Guangxi Natural Science Foundation [2020GXNSFBA297097]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [6216103, 62161031]
  3. Basic Ability Enhancement Project for University Young and Middle-aged Teachers of Guangxi [2022KY0381]
  4. Innovation Project of Guangxi Graduate Education [YCSW2021280]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper proposes a UAV path coverage algorithm based on the greedy strategy and ant colony optimization to address the flight flexibility and energy constraints of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). By introducing a secondary advantage judgment and optimizing it using the ant colony optimization algorithm, the proposed algorithm achieves the goals of minimum time and maximum coverage.
Today, the development of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) has attracted significant attention in both civil and military fields due to their flight flexibility in complex and dangerous environments. However, due to energy constraints, UAVs can only finish a few tasks in a limited time. The problem of finding the best flight path while balancing the task completion time and the coverage rate needs to be resolved urgently. Therefore, this paper proposes a UAV path coverage algorithm base on the greedy strategy and ant colony optimization. Firstly, this paper introduces a secondary advantage judgment and optimizes it using an ant colony optimization algorithm to reach the goal of minimum time and maximum coverage. Simulations are performed for different numbers of mission points and UAVs, respectively. The results illustrate that the proposed algorithm achieves a 2.8% reduction in task completion time while achieving a 4.4% improvement in coverage rate compared to several previous works.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据